Hello list, On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:51:35AM +0100, Félix Faisant wrote:
Hi list,
Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <arch@eckner.net> a écrit :
we took a step forward and now we have: - a name: archlinux32 - a domain: archlinux32.org - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
I thought of the same name so obviously I agree on that.
How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ? I've nothing against though.
I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this has to be final.
Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people to give their opinion before going further.
Giving people some time is essential in opinion for a community project to function. But again its nice to see people take initiative.
Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure closer to Arch dev's one ?
In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for tickets, discussions, and the like.
Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain. I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github so I can't tell.
I have no problem at all for using GitHub. We could also set up a private GitLab somewhere. Since the GitHub organisation is already setup I would go with that.
Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make more sense to copy from them.
Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...
ArchLinuxARM is a good place to get ideas on how to get this project going, but the PKGBUILDs and the tools as already mentioned above will be close to the Arch way.
so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for that - at least to start with.
I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that, but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than a detailed one.
I agree. We should mainly use the list so everybody can follow. IRC is good as well but no archive, so its better for problem solving that actual planning.
Or with other words: City-busz just put a proposal for a build-system on: https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system (it's readable for anyone, I hope)
Great. Seems good for me. Could we precise the signing strategy ?
Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency on builds ?
Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?
From the official Arch ones? Yes, that's what I picked up.
-- nick@discloud.eu GPG: 0x7E8A06A6C80574E4