PWS 433auBut, we might be getting to the point where we actually need a cooker
extranet. For example, I would like to be able to remove build output on
an automated build host to get a package rebuilt, but we wouldn't want
anyone to be able to remove build output ...
Well, SPARC's (and at some point Alpha and Opteron 240 SMP) at CSC are on private network behind 9.1 i586 box. I can't see anything that should stop us from creating the extranet and have the builds automated and coordinated. Some centralised user authentication might be a good idea at some point if we have more developers.
The only drawback would be probably the fact, that single development machines without dedicated front-end might need some more work to configure everything, but I think that it'll be worth it.
Stefan? Olivier? Gwenole? What do you think?
At the moment, to my knowledge we have the following machines _dedicated_ to non-intel cooker development (please, developers, fill in all blanks):
Alpha - 2 x XP1000 - CSC still 7.1b - need help with this - 1 x ?????? - Stefan Van Der Eijk
- others?
mpol has an alpha. Juan has one. there used to be one at the Paris office (same as Juan's?)
SPARC
- 1 x SparcStation 10 SMP - Olivier Thauvin - 1 x SparcClassic - CSC (unused - 32 bit system) - 2 x Ultra 10 - CSC - 1 x Ultra 5 - CSC - others?
PPC
- 1 x ?????? - Olivier Thauvin - others?
x86_64
- 1 x Dual Opteron 240 - CSC (ETA 15 days) - others?
PA-RISC
- 1 x HP 9000 D-class model D390/800 - Stefan van der Eijk (on loan during the summer)
MIPS - 1 x SGI IRIS Indigo - Stefan van der Eijk (RAM defect?)
I think, that only computers solely dedicated (i.e. not used in any other way) may be listed here and eventually included in the extranet.<IMHO>
Because CSC uses Mandrake on all workstations and servers, and we're very happy with it (kudos to both cooker and core development teams!) our position is to support development of the distribution by providing hardware and network resources in return. Naturally we're aware that hosting the machines is serious commitment (especially sustaining the support over time) and we're ready to fulfil it.
Maybe if we manage to pull this off before 9.2 and have all the packages rebuilt, MandrakeSoft will be interested in releasing 9.2 for i586, x86_64, Alpha, Sparc64 and PPC?
Releasing means supporting. supporting a product requires an organisation and knowledge being available. It also needs to be worthwhile --> bring some $$$ to the company. For the alpha, mips, pa-risc and sparc the market is too small.
Since I'm more or less the maintainer of the alpha port, I've had some interesting discussions with mdk employees on this topic. I don't have the illusion that the alpha port will ever turn into a "product" that will be supported and even bring revenue to mdk. I see it as my personal research project --> I want to prove that maintaining multiple ports can be done efficiently...
</IMHO>
Wouldn't it be the first commercial distribution (in couple of years) that allows to run the same system across 5 architectures?We'll have to see... :-)
It would even be nice if we (the community) can maintain these ports and learn a bit & have some fun...
Comments/ideas anyone?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
