Bastian Blank writes ("Re: concerns about Salsa"): > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 12:54:32PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Salsa is hardly the first Debian production service to not be running > > the packaged version of its primary application, and it won't be the > > last. ftp.debian.org isn't running the packaged version of dak. > > Running packaged versions also means that only the system admins can > actually update the code. However they don't want to run the services. > Until we have user-installable packages, this won't change.
These are amongst the reasons I chose the same strategy for my dgit git server service. > > However, I hope it's not running vendor-provided binaries. That would > > be quite poor IMO and a big departure from our normal practice. Are > > you sure that that is the case ? > > GitLab and all the associated stuff is pulled from git repositories and > built on the system. ... > You can find out how everything is done in our repository with Ansible > stuff at https://salsa.debian.org/salsa/salsa-ansible. If you know a > better way to do something, just send patches the usual way. Thanks. That seems like a good approach in general. > However, we actually pull in some external binaries, for node, yarn > and go. That's unfortunate. I'm not sure I have the skills or tuits to help fix it, though :-/. Regards, Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.