Open Stack

On 06/03/2015 04:15 PM, Derek Higgins wrote:
> o Tools to build packages in CI jobs should provide a consistent
> interface regardless of packaging being built

Sure, we can have *some* of the tooling converging. But I don't see
Debian/Ubuntu using anything else than git-buildpackage and sbuild (as
this is what is used everywhere in Debian and Ubuntu), and I don't see
how RPM guys could be using that either.

>> 3) What are the plans for repositories and their contents?
>>
>> What repos will be created, and what will be in them.  When will new
>> ones be created, and is there any process around that.
> 
> Assuming you mean git repositories ? I think anything under the
> openstack (or stackforge) umbrella

Just to make things more clear...

Here, we're talking about the /openstack namespace, which is why the TC
is involved. Otherwise, pushing to /stackforge wouldn't require the
blessing of the TC.

> If you meant package repositories I think none is a fine answer for the
> moment but if there is an appetite for them then I think what would
> eventually make most sense are repositories for master branches along
> with supported stable branches. This may differ between packaging
> formats and what their teams are prepared to support.

As I wrote earlier, we can't technically avoid to have packages stored
in upstream infra, because of build-dependency chains.

Publishing the resulting packages publicly is another story, which we
may decide later on. To me, this really is a tiny small implementation
detail, as what counts anyway, is having stable packages available on
distribution repositories, which means publishing stable package
repositories publicly makes very little sense.

I agree that publishing master/trunk could be a lot of fun though!

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)