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 > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-14-2008, 05:45 AM
"Jeffrey Ollie"
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On 1/14/08, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2008 8:50 PM, Jeffrey Ollie <jeff@ocjtech.us> wrote:
> > >From what I know of CVS, this isn't possible from inside CVS and
> > likely very difficult from outside CVS too. Basically, you'd have to
> > set up a database outside CVS that would track the version (and maybe
> > the MD5/SHA signature) of every file that koji used to build the SRPM.
> > With this setup you could at least know if CVS had been messed with
> > after Koji did the build.
>
> Are you aware of what are cvs is setup to do right now? make srpm
> basically provides the needed functionality in a checked out cvs tree.
> For the purpose of recreating srpms for binaries we distribute
> on-demand we just have to have tags we can trust corresponding to a
> build we can trust. In discussion with infrastructure and release
> people before it was brought up that it would be a good idea to have
> koji re-tag back into cvs after a build to indicate it was a
> releasable build and that its a trivial change in how things are done.

The problem with your line of reasoning is that you can't trust the
tags in CVS. Isn't that why we are having this discussion in the
first place? If people can move the regular tags in CVS (and they
can) they'd be able to move the tags that Koji adds just as easily.

Why not extend the taginfo script already in use to prohibit tag
moving and deletion? For extra points you could only prohibit moving
or deleting tags that had been submitted to Koji for a build (I think
that you'd want to preserve even unsuccessful build tags for
postmortems). While the security/reliability of CVS's scripts isn't
stellar (re the syncmail control-c problems) this would get you closer
to the goal. I think that this would also have a deleterious effect
on the speed of the tagging operation.

Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would
rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about
the integrity of the data.

Jeff

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 05:57 AM
Axel Thimm
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 06:42:37PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2008 3:28 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others
> > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during
> > hackfest/fudcon?
>
> figure out how to get koji to write back an immutable unique tag back
> into cvs for each non-scratch koji build that completes. Or something
> equivalent so we can regenerate srpms from cvs reasonably easily for
> any package version we have released. There is an issue right now
> with forced retagging in cvs still being possible which means we can't
> rely on the tags that get created when a contributor does a make tag.

I would consider "forced retagging" a feature not a bug. Otherwise for
each failed build during development you get a release tag inflation
with no useful %changelog entries (sure one can pile up all comments
about how many bugs one introduced during an upgrade of a package, but
that's not what the %changelog is about .

And having scratch builds to avoid this and a proper one at the end
sounds like too much CPU cycles burning.

But I fully agree on the need to have a reproducable method for
packages. Just don't remove the retagging *feature* for packagers
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 06:02 AM
Axel Thimm
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:01AM -0600, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would
> rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about
> the integrity of the data.

Couldn't agree more - we did have a VCS strike team to determine the
next generation vcs to use, what happened to it (of which I was part
of, so actually it is a question to myself ...). Maybe we should go
away from this list and consult on fedora-infra/buildsys lists again
on what the successor to CVS should be. I think it had boiled down to
either mercurial or git.

(FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember
the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the
symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs
koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but
koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs

--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 06:12 AM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Jan 13, 2008 9:57 PM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@atrpms.net> wrote:
> I would consider "forced retagging" a feature not a bug. Otherwise for
> each failed build during development you get a release tag inflation
> with no useful %changelog entries (sure one can pile up all comments
> about how many bugs one introduced during an upgrade of a package, but
> that's not what the %changelog is about .

Perhaps you read this wrong. I'm not looking to take away the ability
of contributors to retag like they are currently doing. But I want a
way for koji to add an additional tag back into cvs that maintainers
don't need to touch as part of the workflow for creating tags that
koji uses for input.

>
> And having scratch builds to avoid this and a proper one at the end
> sounds like too much CPU cycles burning.

Again perhaps i wasn't clear. I don't care about scratch builds at
all. I don't need people to do scratch builds, I don't need koji to
write a tag back into cvs for scratch builds. I just want koji to
write a tag back to CVS for things that completely a build with a
release candidate target of some sort that we can rely on to exist.
So if I need to regenerate the srpm associated with that koji build
which we released to a public tree.

>
> But I fully agree on the need to have a reproducable method for
> packages. Just don't remove the retagging *feature* for packagers

I'd very much like to avoid removing retagging. If koji was writing
new, specially formatted tags back to CVS at the end of each completed
build would that get in way of using retagging like you have been
using?

-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 06:14 AM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Jan 13, 2008 10:02 PM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@atrpms.net> wrote:
> (FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember
> the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the
> symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs
> koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but
> koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs


I cannot rely on koji holding the information necessary for srpm
regeneration. The information needs to be in cvs, so that the only
thing needed to regenerate the srpm for a specific published binary
rpm is access to an archive of cvs at some future date.

-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:33 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 23:09 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 20:03 -0800, Elliot Lee wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I evaluated various blog systems a while back for use by the
> > community of a large publishing-related site, and Wordpress/Lyceum
> > were among the less desirable ones. Especially avoid Wordpress-MU (it
> > creates a new set of DB tables for every single user...)
> >
> > Just wanted to suggest taking a look at roller.apache.org or
> > blojsom.com. The main Roller hacker also lives in the NC Triangle
> > area, and was very helpful answering my questions in the past, as well
> > as incorporating changes to accomodate my requirements.
> >
>
> The biggest plus to wordpress is its openid integration. According to Mr
> Frields it is top notch and is something we probably want to pursue in
> all of our apps, eventually.

To be fair, I just said it *has it*, but it does appear to work just
fine on my blog. The plugin is here:

http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/openid/

We should do what we can to encourage adoption of OpenID, IMHO.

--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:55 PM
Greg DeKoenigsberg
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote:


On Jan 13, 2008 6:33 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com> wrote:

* being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider
* Seth knows about this as well as of this morning, and didn't
immediately want to kill anyone
* using it to test OpenID capabilities (there's an OpenID 2.0 plugin
for WP)


The Fedoratv codebase is a wordpress derivative as well. So keep that
in mind. Having our own wordpress instance, might mean we can grow a
competent contributor base for both a wordpress and Fedoratv base and
move the Fedoratv development forward more quickly.


It's also been a stated goal of the Percolate folks to bring that codebase
back to being merely a plug-in to Wordpress, instead of an entire fork.
The more capacity/knowledge around Wordpress we can build, the better.


--g

--
Greg DeKoenigsberg
Community Development Manager
Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
"To whomsoever much hath been given...
...from him much shall be asked"

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 02:26 PM
"Jeffrey Ollie"
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On 1/14/08, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2008 10:02 PM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@atrpms.net> wrote:
> > (FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember
> > the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the
> > symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs
> > koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but
> > koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs
>
> I cannot rely on koji holding the information necessary for srpm
> regeneration. The information needs to be in cvs, so that the only
> thing needed to regenerate the srpm for a specific published binary
> rpm is access to an archive of cvs at some future date.

I think that the least disruptive option is to enhance the tag
checking script to prevent moving or deleting CVS tags that have been
submitted to Koji for building. It's not a perfect solution because
CVS provides very weak guarantees of data integrity/consistency but it
may be "good enough".

Jeff

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 02:26 PM
Mike McGrath
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:01AM -0600, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> > Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would
> > rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about
> > the integrity of the data.
>
> Couldn't agree more - we did have a VCS strike team to determine the
> next generation vcs to use, what happened to it (of which I was part
> of, so actually it is a question to myself ...). Maybe we should go
> away from this list and consult on fedora-infra/buildsys lists again
> on what the successor to CVS should be. I think it had boiled down to
> either mercurial or git.

No one ever really stood up and said "Here's my vision for what I think
the next VCS should be" and stood with it (through the fire and flames
that will come to anyone who does that). We had some people get into
some very good discussions but unfortunately I think $DAYJOB is in the
way.

If someone is interested, here's the page, start putting meetings
together. Until that time I think we're stuck with CVS.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/SCMSig

-Mike

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2008, 02:30 PM
Mike McGrath
 
Default "Action Items" From FUDCon?

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Max Spevack wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>
> > * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider
>
> If the decision is made to do this, then any work that we do in this area
> could be immediately useful to Red Hat Magazine, which has had occasionaly
> infrastructure difficulties but right now is running on Lyceum.
>
> I'd be willing to wager that the Fedora setup could meet our needs and also
> theirs, and perhaps lead to a deal in which whatever hardware they are using
> can be included into our pool provided that we keep Red Hat Magazine up, which
> would be a very small amount of additional work on top of what it seems like
> we might do anyway.
>
> Does what I'm trying to say make sense? If we do X work to get our own
> multi-user blog infrastructure up, for a very small amount we might be able to
> do a better and cheaper job for the Red Hat Magazine folks, and in doing so be
> able to make use of some of their hardware.

This is something we can certainly look at. I've created a bug for those
that want to take an interest in how its installed/reviewed:

https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/342

Its down as a Fedora 10 milestone though hopefully we can get some time /
space to do it prior to that.

-Mike

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:22 PM.

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