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 > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-19-2011, 11:50 PM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Hi all,

I just wanted to write here a clarification regarding self-produced
distfiles, such as patchset tarballs, SCM snapshots and the like. Some
people seem under the impression that the correct way to host these is
to use mirror://gentoo/ and copy them on /space/distfiles-local on
dev.g.o. Please don't do this.

If you produced the file yourself, and it doesn't matter if the file is
reproducible (unless it is reproducible to sha512 identity), please use
the public_html directory in your dev.gentoo.org home to host these.
This makes sure that the file won't be deleted from all its sources if
the ebuild is removed (or more likely replaced) from tree. Ask the Emacs
team how "easy" has been to recover gentoo-syntax files before.

Yes, we all know that the history with the Infra team has been against
this idea, but until there is a proper replacement for this handling,
the Gentoo sources archive, we really shouldn't be putting the data in
non-permanent locations, the team should, nowadays, be on the same page
as me on this.

Pushing files that are still available somewhere else, but cannot be
directly fetched for whatever reason is still to be bone
through /space/distfiles-local.

*PLEASE NOTE:* This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask
soon to enforce this. This requirement, though, _will_ be superseded as
soon as Infra provides us with a proper archive for this kind of files.

Thank you,
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 12:07 AM
Rich Freeman
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Diego Elio Petten <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> *PLEASE NOTE:* This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask
> soon to enforce this.

Forward going? Or, should we go ahead and start retroactively
updating ebuilds that have mirror:// in them right now? Presumably
without a revbump over something like this...

Rich
 
Old 01-20-2011, 12:17 AM
Theo Chatzimichos
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Thursday 20 January 2011 02:50:35 Diego Elio Petten wrote:
> *PLEASE NOTE:* This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask
> soon to enforce this. This requirement, though, _will_ be superseded as
> soon as Infra provides us with a proper archive for this kind of files.

I usually create snapshots for kde apps (or kde app deps) till the actual
release arises. Why should I keep them in my homedir, since I do want those
tarballs to be deleted after the ebuild's removal? I'm sorry, but I object to
that enforcement, me (the maintainer) knows better on what to do with his
custom tarballs.
--
Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap)
Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:44 AM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 19:50:35 Diego Elio Petten wrote:
> *PLEASE NOTE:* This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask
> soon to enforce this. This requirement, though, _will_ be superseded as
> soon as Infra provides us with a proper archive for this kind of files.

you really need to start off discussions as "here is the problem i perceive
and here is a solution i think will address it". shooting off e-mails from on
high as an official edict without room for discussion is no way to run a team.
-mike
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:50 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno mer, 19/01/2011 alle 21.44 -0500, Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
>
> you really need to start off discussions as "here is the problem i
> perceive
> and here is a solution i think will address it". shooting off e-mails
> from on
> high as an official edict without room for discussion is no way to run
> a team.

There is nothing new or revolutionary in what I said — are you trying to
challenge the need for traceability of distfiles?

Sure we should find a better solution than dev.gentoo.org, but Robin's
already working on that. This is a transitional solution that allows us
to have stable source URIs, and encodes what most of us (including me
and *you* by the way) have been doing already.

Do you really think I should have "discussed" with "a team" about this?
More than asking Robin as part of infra if it's okay (with his answer
being "yeah, that's fine | i do it too", literally)?

I'm not going to force my hand here with stuff that is up to debate, but
seriously, *this*?

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:51 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno gio, 20/01/2011 alle 02.05 +0100, Ch*-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
ha scritto:
>
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/mirrors/index.html claims
> that dev.gentoo.org is not acceptable for hosting main-tree items,
> and
> they must be moved to mirror://gentoo before release.

Yes I know and I'll update ASAP.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:53 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno gio, 20/01/2011 alle 03.17 +0200, Theo Chatzimichos ha
scritto:
>
>
> I usually create snapshots for kde apps (or kde app deps) till the
> actual
> release arises. Why should I keep them in my homedir, since I do want
> those
> tarballs to be deleted after the ebuild's removal? I'm sorry, but I
> object to
> that enforcement, me (the maintainer) knows better on what to do with
> his
> custom tarballs.

We need a way to track the files for things that are provided in Gentoo,
by license if they are used for binary packages as well.

If you keep the prerelease in overlay, do as you wish, but for main tree
please use stable URLs please. Especially if the ebuild ever gets to
stable keywording.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:55 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

Il giorno mer, 19/01/2011 alle 20.07 -0500, Rich Freeman ha scritto:
> Forward going? Or, should we go ahead and start retroactively
> updating ebuilds that have mirror:// in them right now? Presumably
> without a revbump over something like this...
>

I wouldn't mind if it was done retroactively, but I'm not going to ask
right now for all the ebuilds in tree right now to be converted. If you
do happen to pass through a bunch of old ebuilds and edit them anyway
please do update them to use long-term-reachable URLs.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 01-20-2011, 01:56 AM
Matt Turner
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Il giorno mer, 19/01/2011 alle 21.44 -0500, Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
>>
>> you really need to start off discussions as "here is the problem i
>> perceive
>> and here is a solution i think will address it". *shooting off e-mails
>> from on
>> high as an official edict without room for discussion is no way to run
>> a team.
>
> There is nothing new or revolutionary in what I said — are you trying to
> challenge the need for traceability of distfiles?

Good grief. No.

He seems to be simply stating that you'd do better to say "we have a
problem with $this and I think it'd be fixed with $that" instead of
"This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask soon to
enforce this."

Not hosting distfiles from dev.g.o is a reasonable thing that I think
everyone understands and agrees with, but "this will be official
policy" jargon is annoying and doesn't really serve any purpose.

Matt
 
Old 01-20-2011, 02:31 AM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default On hosting self-produced distfiles

On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 21:56:52 Matt Turner wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > Il giorno mer, 19/01/2011 alle 21.44 -0500, Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
> >> you really need to start off discussions as "here is the problem i
> >> perceive
> >> and here is a solution i think will address it". shooting off e-mails
> >> from on
> >> high as an official edict without room for discussion is no way to run
> >> a team.
> >
> > There is nothing new or revolutionary in what I said — are you trying to
> > challenge the need for traceability of distfiles?
>
> Good grief. No.
>
> He seems to be simply stating that you'd do better to say "we have a
> problem with $this and I think it'd be fixed with $that" instead of
> "This is to be considered QA policy, so we're going to ask soon to
> enforce this."

pretty much. no point in getting your panties in a bunch.

here's a better idea: figure out something with the infra team. we havent
hosted files on dev.g.o because we've felt the distfiles tree to be
sufficient. since there seems to be more need now, let's find out what infra
can do to help out.

again, declaring policy ahead of talking to anyone else is not the way to go.
-mike
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:56 AM.

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