[arch-dev-public] abs split and changes (was: Status questions)
aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Thu Jan 3 16:04:47 EST 2008
On Jan 3, 2008 2:55 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2008 2:30 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 2008 2:27 PM, eliott <eliott at cactuswax.net> wrote:
> > > 2. ABS move to rsync.
> > > There was some talk regarding moving ABS away from cvsup, towards a
> > > more generalized scm agnostic solution such as rsync. I had a proof of
> > > concept abs implementation using rsync functional, and sent patches to
> > > *someone* (memory is foggy..maybe it was Dan?). Is this still
> > > something on the general todo list?
> > You sent patches to me. Last status report I mentioned that we're
> > waiting for 3.1 as it should split out abs into a new package,
> > allowing us to make these changes at the same time.
> git clone git://projects.archlinux.org/abs.git abs
> Anyone want to take this on? It really isn't a high maintenance thing.
> It has been split into its own repository now, and anyone can take it
> and run with Eliott's idea (which I'll give a +1). It really shouldn't
> be too much of a burden on anyone, and you get that awesome feeling of
> leading a project (even if it is small!). I'm willing to help out, but
> my "full-time" duties will always tend to be with pacman so this might
> not get as much love from me as someone else could give it.
Cheers! And thanks.
I have the "patches" (which is, in fact, a tarball of actual files,
heh) that I can apply. I am busy most of the night but can likely get
to this later - Eliott, Dan, would you like me to forward this on to
you guys in case one of you are faster?
It'd be nice if we can get some more hands in the code around here.
Right now it seems the only projects moving are the ones spearheaded
by Dan and/or Eliott and I may have made some recent changes to the
initscripts stuff, but it was more merging other people's patches.
I'm *sure* we have more coders than this, so it'd be nice to get other
people doing some work on this. If that isn't feasible, we're going to
have to bring on more developers in this capacity, otherwise these
projects are going to stagnate.
What it means to take ownership of ABS:
* You gain full control of the code base
* You release the future "abs" package
* You make most of the decisions regarding ABS (though, hefty ones
should be discussed, it's only fair).
Anyone willing to swing the bat?
More information about the arch-dev-public