Hey Steve, Steve Langasek wrote: >On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:41:59AM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> >- the release architecture must have N+1 buildds where N is the number >> > required to keep up with the volume of uploaded packages > >> >- the value of N above must not be > 2 > >> When you say "N+1" buildds for a release architecture, do you mean >> _exactly_ N+1, or _at least_ N+1? > >At least; although, there are some concerns about plugging too many machines >into wanna-build for each arch, both for scalability reasons (hopefully >addressed once we have connection caching support on newraff) and, I >suspect, for security reasons (since the thinner we spread our autobuilder >network, the more danger there is, statistically, of a trojan being >injected), so it may be that in most cases no more than N+1 would actually >be allowed at any one time.
The scalability issue can be solved, either with connection caching or maybe some other way. The security argument seems a little thin, to be honest - we already have binaries built and uploaded from developers' machines all over the world. So long as an arch team can communicate effectively, I'd push for a greater number of buildds for better resiliency. >> Also, a common complaint I've heard recently is that several of the >> SCC architecture buildd problems were being caused by lack of >> time. Not machines, not offered effort, but lack of time to do buildd >> setup/maintenance work by central buildd admins. Note: I'm NOT >> attributing this to malice or incompetence - people need to sleep and >> have some semblance of a life outside Debian, after all! m68k has >> shown that a larger team of buildd admins and machines can work >> effectively, allowing the least powerful of our architectures to keep >> up admirably well in recent months. Is the plan for etch to still >> continue to run with centrally-controlled buildds, or will it be >> opened up? > >The partial answer I was given for this was to wait and see how well >ftp-master scales once connection caching is in place, before committing to >giving porters free reign to plug new autobuilders into the network. OK, cool. I await the results of the changes with interest. :-) Thanks, -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome my son, welcome to the machine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]