[arch-ports] [i686] Next steps
xcodexif at xif.fr
Wed Feb 1 23:51:35 UTC 2017
Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <arch at eckner.net> a écrit :
>>> we took a step forward and now we have:
>>> - a name: archlinux32
>>> - a domain: archlinux32.org
>>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32
>> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ?
>> I've nothing against though.
> I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this
> has to be final.
Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people
to give their opinion before going further.
>> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure
>> closer to Arch dev's one ?
> In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally
> disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for
> tickets, discussions, and the like.
Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain.
I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be
appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github
so I can't tell.
> Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make
> more sense to copy from them.
Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with
Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell...
>>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details.
>> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ?
> true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have
> a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't
> we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for
> that - at least to start with.
I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that,
but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than
a detailed one.
> Or with other words: City-busz just put a
> proposal for a build-system on:
> (it's readable for anyone, I hope)
Great. Seems good for me.
Could we precise the signing strategy ?
Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent
one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency
on builds ?
Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ?
Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the arch-ports