[arch-dev-public] The move to SVN

[Travis Willard]

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Jason Chu <jason at archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 05:26:33PM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>  > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Jason Chu <jason at archlinux.org> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 04:39:18PM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>  > >  > Top posting, wheee 8)
>  > >  >
>  > >  > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Travis Willard <travis at archlinux.org> wrote:
>  > >  > >  As I mentioned on Jabber, I've got an rsync-based ABS script totally
>  > >  > >  ready for a testrun or two.  In fact, I think I'll commit it to the
>  > >  > >  ABS repo tonight so's you can have a look-see if you want.
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > >  I'm still unsure how to generate the rsync repo to pull from.  Would a
>  > >  > >  db-scripts patch work best, do you think?  We can co-ordinate on this
>  > >  > >  if you want, I'm perfectly willing to do the work for that.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > I think you should assume, for the time being, that the rsync
>  > >  > directory is there. We should have a checkout that is synced on each
>  > >  > commit, I think. But it could even be a cron job - for right now,
>  > >  > assume it just exists, unless you want to figure out the best/simplest
>  > >  > way to do that. I'd probably start off with a cron job, just for the
>  > >  > "path of least resistance" part of it
>  > >
>  > >  Agreed a cron job would be the easiest.  It's a simple script that would
>  > >  have to find all the repos/<blah> directories and extract their contents.
>  > >
>  > >  I may write one and just test it with my old svnarch repo.
>  >
>  > Yeah, it's easy, but also may be lost effort if done poorly, as it
>  > won't be able to do the "up to date" check, it will have to do a full
>  > CO each time... as long as we keep some sort of perma-checkout sitting
>  > somewhere... /me shrugs
>
>  Yeah, planned on keeping a perma-checkout sitting somewhere ;)

So, uh, yeah.  Now that it's April 2 and I clearly didn't quit,
there's a new version of ABS in git that uses rsync to do its
business.  It's heavily based off Eliott's work, and tested decently
thoroughly, so I think it's good to go.  Thanks Eliott!

Basically, it expects the ABS tree to be stored on the server in the format:

${RSYNC_ROOT}/{$ARCH}/${REPO}/*

Where RSYNC_ROOT is wherever the rsync stanza points to (currently
/srv/abs), ARCH is i686 or x86_64, and REPO is the repo.  Anything in
that tree will be synch'd for that repo.

I've currently got some static checkouts sitting in /srv/abs for each
repo that can probably just be updated (except for testing) on a
fairly-frequent basis with "cvs update" thanks to sticky-tags, and can
change to whatever svn method we need when we change to svn.

I wasn't sure how to get multiple repos checked out into the same dir
for testing, and didn't spend a lot of time looking at it since we're
switching to svn anyway.

Anyway, yeah.  New ABS is in git.  Whee.  I'll probably try to close
the one FS report I've got for makeworld and get some of the todo list
for makeworld completed before I actually tag as 2.0, though.  We'll
see how much I get done.