[arch-general] Question about automated builder

[C Anthony Risinger]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ray Rashif <schiv at archlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> On 28 January 2011 01:36, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I have been passively working on a similar project called quarters, but I
>> > must admit that my motivation is somewhat low not knowing if the project
>> is
>> > in demand. So here is my question, do we think that something like this
>> > would be a benefit to Arch? Is this the type of project that should merit
>> my
>> > attention?
>>
>> You have my personal full support.
>>
>> Does this Koji allow people to upload their own .spec/.src packages
>> and offer them a build? I'm thinking something like that for quarters
>> would be good. We can separate the building into 3 categories:
>>
>> == Distribution ==
>> This is where devs and TUs connect. If you can work out some kind of
>> integration, it will be totally seamless. Subversion hooks can trigger
>> the builds, which then are placed in the respective home folders in
>> gerolde/sigurd. They can be auto uploaded with dbscripts as well but I
>> don't know if that's a good idea, mainly because there needs to be
>> inspection (namcap and other habits) before the binary gets served
>> across the mirrors.
>>
>> == Projects ==
>> Any third-party packaging initiative can hook up to the system, and in
>> turn get their binaries cooked. No-one is responsible for bad
>> packages.
>>
>> == Community ==
>> Users submit a PKGBUILD and in turn can download a Pacman package.
>> No-one is responsible for bad packages.
>>
>
> HAHA! I had not thought of that! I love it! The build system can build user
> packages from uploaded PKGBUILDS, I would need to add some extra security on
> the chroots (or build them in super thin virtual machines), but that would
> be great, users could verify that their packages were top notch before
> submitting them to the AUR and TUs could check packages much more easily.
>
> As for the svn hooks, I was actually looking at polling the scms, this way
> an scm can be completely detached from the builder and the builder can just
> arbitrarily build from any old scm. I think that the solution here is to
> configure the scms with specific criteria, so that they build into specific
> repos.
>
> And thanks for your support Ray, it means a lot :)

did somebody say distributed AUR?

add a little P2P sharing of the PKG bits into localized repositories
and you got yourself a winner.

C Anthony