FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-30-2011, 09:52 PM
Karanbir Singh
 
Default Continous Release

hi,

Johnny and I spoke about this a few days back and we think the best way
to solve the problem around delayed srpms + waiting for isos, build and
QA at the time of a point release is to get something like a 'Continous
Release' repository going.

The Problem: At a point release stage, users dont get updates till such
time as the ISOS are ready ( eg. during the 5.6 release process ), the
updates are built, QA has had time to verify content and the mirrors
sync up. For new installs, this isnt an issue; however for people with
existing installs this can potentially expose their installations.

One solution: Export packages as they are built from the c[456]bsys into
a repository that people can opt into, that would allow them to get
early access to packages.

Couple of notes:
- it would have to be opt-in, rather than default for everyone

- packages into the CR repo's will not be announced via the regular
channels; the announcements will still only happen when rpms are visible
in the os/ and updates/ repos.

- it will not mean a lesser or a worse quality of builds, we hope to
have enough automation in place that rpms will only be released into
this repo once we are sure that it meets the release requirements.

- this repository will run off centos.org machines initially, and will
not be released to third party mirrors. The exact details of how the
release-to-external-mirrors takes place, and how we manage the issues
around that would be a conversation we can relegate into the future for now.

- the CR repos will go-away once rpms are released in the regular
process, it will not transfer into a rolling release type repo.

At this stage, we are looking for comments as we prep for future release
process.

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-30-2011, 11:12 PM
Alan Bartlett
 
Default Continous Release

On 30 May 2011 22:52, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org> wrote:

> Johnny and I spoke about this a few days back and we think the best way
> to solve the problem around delayed srpms + waiting for isos, build and
> QA at the time of a point release is to get something like a 'Continous
> Release' repository going.

<snip>

> One solution: Export packages as they are built from the c[456]bsys into
> a repository that people can opt into, that would allow them to get
> early access to packages.

That reads like a very good solution, to me.

I would certainly appreciate the updated packages that resolve
particular CVEs, whereas for plain bug-fixes I could wait.

Alan.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 11:44 AM
Matthew Miller
 
Default Continous Release

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:52:01PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> - this repository will run off centos.org machines initially, and will
> not be released to third party mirrors. The exact details of how the
> release-to-external-mirrors takes place, and how we manage the issues
> around that would be a conversation we can relegate into the future for now.

Works for me as a start, but we'd be really happy to mirror them for you
as soon as possible.


--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 11:44 AM
Matthew Miller
 
Default Continous Release

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:52:01PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> - this repository will run off centos.org machines initially, and will
> not be released to third party mirrors. The exact details of how the
> release-to-external-mirrors takes place, and how we manage the issues
> around that would be a conversation we can relegate into the future for now.

Works for me as a start, but we'd be really happy to mirror them for you
as soon as possible.


--
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 03:12 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Continous Release

On 5/30/2011 6:12 PM, Alan Bartlett wrote:
>
>> Johnny and I spoke about this a few days back and we think the best way
>> to solve the problem around delayed srpms + waiting for isos, build and
>> QA at the time of a point release is to get something like a 'Continous
>> Release' repository going.
>
> <snip>
>
>> One solution: Export packages as they are built from the c[456]bsys into
>> a repository that people can opt into, that would allow them to get
>> early access to packages.
>
> That reads like a very good solution, to me.
>
> I would certainly appreciate the updated packages that resolve
> particular CVEs, whereas for plain bug-fixes I could wait.

Agreed on the security-related fixes being the important ones, but I
suspect that build-order dependencies will apply anyway and there's no
reason to hold back working updates. In any case, prioritizing the
update stream ahead of work on anaconda and iso-building makes sense for
the same reasons 5.6 was pushed ahead of 6.x work. It's just bad for
everyone to leave known security vulnerabilities on currently running
machines. Personally, I'd consider that important enough to make it the
default, although in that case maybe they should go though the 'testing'
repo first and require some large-scale feedback first.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 04:16 PM
Alan Bartlett
 
Default Continous Release

On 31 May 2011 16:12, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/2011 6:12 PM, Alan Bartlett wrote:

>> I would certainly appreciate the updated packages that resolve
>> particular CVEs, whereas for plain bug-fixes I could wait.

> Agreed on the security-related fixes being the important ones, but I
> suspect that build-order dependencies will apply anyway and there's no
> reason to hold back working updates. *In any case, prioritizing the
> update stream ahead of work on anaconda and iso-building makes sense for
> the same reasons 5.6 was pushed ahead of 6.x work. *It's just bad for
> everyone to leave known security vulnerabilities on currently running
> machines. *Personally, I'd consider that important enough to make it the
> default, although in that case maybe they should go though the 'testing'
> repo first and require some large-scale feedback first.

I had given a brief thought to the build-order dependencies and
decided that if a security bug-fix could be pushed out as soon as it
could be built, I would then -- once the full point update had been
released -- perform a "yum reinstall" for all those "fast" security
fixes. A bit hazy around the edges, so I would leave the fuller
details to those greater wizards to ponder.

Alan.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 06:23 PM
Manuel Wolfshant
 
Default Continous Release

On 05/31/2011 02:12 AM, Alan Bartlett wrote:
> On 30 May 2011 22:52, Karanbir Singh<mail-lists@karan.org> wrote:
>
>> Johnny and I spoke about this a few days back and we think the best way
>> to solve the problem around delayed srpms + waiting for isos, build and
>> QA at the time of a point release is to get something like a 'Continous
>> Release' repository going.
> <snip>
>
>> One solution: Export packages as they are built from the c[456]bsys into
>> a repository that people can opt into, that would allow them to get
>> early access to packages.
> That reads like a very good solution, to me.
>
> I would certainly appreciate the updated packages that resolve
> particular CVEs, whereas for plain bug-fixes I could wait.
+1
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 10:49 PM
Karanbir Singh
 
Default Continous Release

Hi Matt,

On 05/31/2011 12:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:52:01PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> - this repository will run off centos.org machines initially, and will
>> not be released to third party mirrors. The exact details of how the
> Works for me as a start, but we'd be really happy to mirror them for you
> as soon as possible.

Thanks for the offer.

The reason why we were thinking of keeping it on centos.org machines is
so we can manage it a bit. In case we need to remove content from the
repo, or replace content we would like to be able to do that
really-quickly. Also, we need to workout a mechanism to make this CR
repo go away in an elegant manner once content is released into the main
os/ and updates/ repo.

Would be interesting if the CR repo could have a hard dependancy on the
OS/ and Updates/ repo ( ~ it would only work if the machine also had the
os/ and updates/ repo enabled ).

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 10:50 PM
Karanbir Singh
 
Default Continous Release

On 05/31/2011 04:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> machines. Personally, I'd consider that important enough to make it the
> default, although in that case maybe they should go though the 'testing'
> repo first and require some large-scale feedback first.

It would be interesting to see what you think are the tests these
packages should go through first. I dont disagree, and I have a list of
my own - but it would be great to get some more opinions on this subject.

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 05-31-2011, 11:33 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Continous Release

On 5/31/2011 5:50 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 05/31/2011 04:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> machines. Personally, I'd consider that important enough to make it the
>> default, although in that case maybe they should go though the 'testing'
>> repo first and require some large-scale feedback first.
>
> It would be interesting to see what you think are the tests these
> packages should go through first. I dont disagree, and I have a list of
> my own - but it would be great to get some more opinions on this subject.

It is just hard to duplicate the whole 'real-world' in tests so no
matter what you do you may have surprises when things are deployed to a
large number of users. To a certain extent this is a special case since
it should be identical to the upstream binaries which already have hit a
large user base, though - but there are still unpredictable things that
can go wrong. My opinion is that it would be best to expose the initial
release as 'test' quality and let a large number of people try it in a
large number of environments - knowing that they should treat it as a test.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org