[arch-releng] Reviving archiso releases?

[Pierre Schmitz]

Am 31.07.2012 01:35, schrieb Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi:
> On 07/30/2012 06:52 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote:
>> On 07/30/2012 07:19 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>>> Am 28.07.2012 03:26, schrieb Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi:
>>>> On 07/27/2012 09:49 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> as I plan a new iso for next week, I was wondering if we should create
>>>>> tags for archiso so I can create an actual package to be put into the
>>>>> repos. This would simplify the building process and reduces some
>>>>> possible issues from e.g. an inconsistent archiso install. (e.g. if you
>>>>> just run make install old files wont get removed from the root-image
>>>>> directory. Imho the more we can automate and standardize here the
>>>>> better.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess the easiest way would be to use a versioning scheme like in
>>>>> arch-install scripts (every tag increments the version by one) or a date
>>>>> based one (e.g. 20120728). We could just tag a new release a few days
>>>>> before the new iso gets created and update the package.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what do you think about this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>
>>>>> Pierre
>>>>>
>>>> Oh yes, I want to do this since long time :)
>>> So, as I'd like to create a new iso this week it would be good to have
>>> archiso packaged before. Did you push the recent changes into a
>>> non-public repo somewhere? I could also push patches directly to
>>> projects.archlinux.org (after they are discussed) to make your life
>>> easier.
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>
>> Nope, I want some feedback from Thomas ;) Please push them to your git repo like with previous patches. Thanks :)
>>
> OK here [#1] is done, all your patches with some minor modifications
> + gen [core] removed.
> 
> https://github.com/djgera/archiso/compare/experimental

We could probably improve our workflow a bit; atm I am not sure what is
best though. The problem is that atm the repo on projects.archlinux.org
is only used to build the releng images (which are kind of broken atm)
and the release isos are build from a different repo. Maybe we could use
different branches or split out the parts that are specific to our iso.

-- 
Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com