[arch-dev-public] Starting x86_64_v3 port

[Thore Bödecker]

Shouldn't we rather recruit people to help with build automation, git
migration and the other topics that keep biting us whenever we try adopting
new stuff in a timely manner and/or with less manual stuff to do?

I fully agree with Morten on this one and we should definitely get our
infra and build automation sorted out first, before thinking about
trying to "compete" with new features that other distros might offer.

Admittedly I've been intrigued by the x86_64_v3/x86_64_v4 targets for
a while but no matter how I look at it, having better build automation
and tooling around it is an absolute blocker for this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally in favour of this proposal in the
hopefully not too distant future, just not right now until the
aforementioned blockers have been resolved.


On 29.01.22 23:49, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 29/1/22 23:02, Morten Linderud wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 10:53:41PM +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > > Exactly the same as it did in the i686/x86_64 days.  Some packagers will
> > > upload both variants, some will not.  There was a webpage that showed the
> > > package differences between the architectures and a group of people built
> > > and uploaded packages to keep x86_64 in sync.  This was particularly
> > > important when many devs did not have x86_64 hardware yet.
> > >
> > > We may/will need to recruit some people to do these rebuilds.  The number of
> > > people needed depends on how many packagers would package for both
> > > architectures.
> >
> > This doesn't explain what I wanted to know though.
> >
> > Are you expecting we find 5-10-20 people and then onboard them as developers or TUs?
> >
> > Are you envioning a seperate signing keyring, or are you planning on adding them
> > to the archlinux-keyring?
> >
> > How are we dealing with access? Do they get full access to our package repos as
> > devs, or are you planning on a seperate role which has access to the required
> > repositories? This is relevant because of how dbscripts is deployed on gemini.
> >
> > All of this requires a fair bit of planning and thought before it's a feasable
> > option to mention.
>
> Assuming we need people to help the x86_64_v3 port, I would post a news item
> and have people apply.  We have advertised developer positions in the past
> and received dozens of applications, and readily filled the available
> positions with quality applicants.  They would be brought on as Package
> Maintainers (once approved on the staff list) with access to [extra] and
> [community], and have packaging privileges including being added to the
> keyring.
>
> While advertising for x86_64_v3 specific packagers, we should make a list of
> other packaging areas needing help and recruit for those too.
>
> Allan

Grüße,
Thore

--
Thore Bödecker

GPG ID: 0xD622431AF8DB80F3
GPG FP: 0F96 559D 3556 24FC 2226  A864 D622 431A F8DB 80F3
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20220129/2ece528c/attachment.sig>