Hi list, Le 2 févr. 2017 à 00:01, Erich Eckner <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>> we took a step forward and now we have: >>> - a name: archlinux32 >>> - a domain: archlinux32.org >>> - a collaboration on github.com: https://github.com/archlinux32 >> >> How were they chosen, and by who ? Did I miss something ? >> I've nothing against though. > > I didn't want to be bold, but I just took initiative. Nothing of this > has to be final. Of course. Maybe we could just wait a day or two for interested people to give their opinion before going further. >> Wouldn't be more appropriate to setup a git and to keep an infrastructure >> closer to Arch dev's one ? > > In the end, one could think of cgit on our own server totally > disconnected from github, but then we'd probably reinvent the wheel for > tickets, discussions, and the like. Well, it's quite easy to setup and would not be difficult to maintain. I think it's more a question of efficiency. And indeed github could be appropriate for such low volume of work. But I don't use github so I can't tell. > Our case is closer to archlinuxarm than archlinux, so it seems to make > more sense to copy from them. Even if the vast majority of PKGBUILDs and tool would be kept synced with Arch's ones ? Again, I didn't look close enough to archlinuxarm to tell... >>> so we can brainstorm and sort out details. >> >> Isn't it the very purpose of this list to brainstorm and sort out details ? > > true, but how detailed should the discussion herein become? Once we have > a platform for git, tracking issues and discussing code lines, shouldn't > we switch to that one? I thought, github would be a good platform for > that - at least to start with. I think it's appropriated for per-package discussions or anything like that, but for the moment, it's more a general/technical discussion rather than a detailed one. > Or with other words: City-busz just put a > proposal for a build-system on: > https://github.com/archlinux32/builder/wiki/Build-system > (it's readable for anyone, I hope) Great. Seems good for me. Could we precise the signing strategy ? Moreover, as building is done on a single machine, we thus need a decent one. I'm not really aware of the needed power. What would be the frequency on builds ? Finally, it's quite obvious we will keep separate repos, right ? ---- Félix Faisant - PGP : ce67 00ae c4c3 2446 032c f89a 4e4f a7af f464 8355
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ arch-ports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-ports
