[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Redefining [testing] and a new [staging] repo

Ray Kohler ataraxia937 at gmail.com
Fri May 7 13:50:01 EDT 2010

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 May 2010 12:13:33 -0500, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> So in effect, it seems we're saying the same things, except I am using
>> REPO_NAME="foo-rebuild" for each rebuild "foo", and you are using
>> REPO_NAME="staging" for *all* rebuilds.
> Somehow yes, but the detail is quite important. But a already existing
> repo will make things a lot easier. Maybe its worth to manually create a
> separate repo but probably not for just a few. We also sometimes upload
> packages somewhere to share or let others grab them from our home dirs on
> gerolde. Such a repo would simplify this and induce a general work flow for
> e.g. rebuilds.
> But still, the main intention is to make testing more usable to get more
> feedback and in turn have less bugs in core/extra.
>> This can already be done, the staging dir just needs to be added to the
>> server.
>> It would, however, need to be excluded from rsync if you want that.
> Sure, the implementation of this is a peace of cake: mostly a mkdir and
> maybe adding some shortcuts to devtools and dbscripts to have something
> like stagingpkg and staging2extra etc..

This makes me wonder, what about the TUs and [community-testing]? The
current use of that repo would make it seem sensible to rename it to
[community-staging] instead, since it's rare there's anything in there
but in-progress rebuilds. Or should there be a pair of
[community-testing] and [community-staging]?

Sorry about adding complexity to this, as I realize that makes it less
likely that it actually gets implemented...

More information about the arch-general mailing list