I'd like to attempt to summarise if I may:
1. Generic packages.cloudstack.org location
2. location contains both noredist & oss - clearly identified
3.
a. All other repos can be added as mirrors.
b. [comment] If fastest mirror type feature can be supported - fantastic.
So. My understanding is that to make the packages in the repo 'official' they
must be voted on. -- would we make the packages what we vote on, rather that
the source code (bearing in mind you can't separate the packaging in that
case). IMHO, it'll make testing a whole lot simpler for folks if there is
just no requirement to build from source.
Regards,
Paul Angus
VP Technology/Cloud Architect
S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: @CloudyAngus
paul.an...@shapeblue.com | www.shapeblue.com | Twitter:@shapeblue
ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
-----Original Message-----
From: Rajani Karuturi [mailto:rajani.karut...@citrix.com]
Sent: 27 November 2015 05:14
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Package Repositories
+1 to what Remi said.
One source for packages on a generic domain with everyone in community trying
to make it better.
And, please do not mention different domains for systemvm templates in
documentation. That is even more confusing.
~ Rajani
-----Original Message-----
From: Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro>
Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Date: Thursday, 26 November 2015 at 10:38 PM
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Package Repositories
>+1 what Remi said.
>
>Jenkins is already building packages and system templates, when we release a
>version let's also copy one of those builds and make them "official".
>Let's use this enhancement as well with a sensible release number
>(Y-M-D-#build?) https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1075
>
>Nothing against listing on the side community builds such as the Shapeblue
>ones and which extra functionality they provide etc.
>As long as someone installs Cloudstack, it's a win, doesn't matter the
>package. :)
>
>Lucian
>
>--
>Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
>Nux!
>www.nux.ro
>
>----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Remi Bergsma" <rberg...@schubergphilis.com>
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Thursday, 26 November, 2015 16:22:00
>> Subject: Re: Package Repositories
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I do appreciate any effort to make it easy for users. My main point
>> of worry is that it is confusing to have different companies supply
>> packages of what is supposed to be a single product. Which one should they
>> pick?
>>
>> If we look at it, we have two types of packages: the OSS and NOREDIST
>> versions.
>> It does make sense to list those and make them available for easy
>> use. I’m also fine with mentioning they were build by 3rd parties as
>> the project currently doesn’t officially release them. I just really
>> don’t like putting links to company web sites that give users the
>> impression there are many different versions. In the past months
>> we’ve had several users on the list reporting they run the
>> “ShapeBlue” version. I just don’t know what that means and if it
>> indeed happens to be the same then I think it’s weird they even mention it.
>> It is confusing. We should’t be doing that IMHO.
>>
>> I propose to put those packages on a generic domain like
>> packages.cloudstack.org (or something with apache.org), have them
>> build and published by Jenkins and then have companies like
>> ShapeBlue, PCExtreme, Schuberg Philis, etc etc provide mirrors to
>> serve different regions. The DNS would simply resolve to one of the
>> mirrors, or whatever config we want. We then get the best of both:
>> one place to go for users (for both OSS/NOREDIST) backed by any
>> company or person in the community that wants to sponsor resources.
>> Jenkins can be controlled by any one of us already. Any link on the website,
>> in documentation and hardcoded links in the source should point to the
>> generic url.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Remi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Rohit Yadav
>> <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>>
>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>"
>> <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Date: Thursday 26 November 2015 16:32
>> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>"
>> <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Subject: Re: Package Repositories
>>
>> Just some points of information from my side;
>>
>> - We (bunch of people at ShapeBlue) took this initiative to provide
>> packages as a convenience to users, there were existing 3rd party
>> repositories at that time but we found they were poorly maintained,
>> for example - packages and systemvmtemplates were not readily
>> available after any release or after discovery of any security issues
>> (such as ghost, poodle issues etc)
>>
>> - We also wanted to list all the things new users would need on *a
>> single page* such as where to get packages, systemvmtemplate and
>> documentation, see http://shapeblue.com/packages. This page has all
>> the necessary information about the packages such as what they are
>> (upstream, main etc) and how they were built and other information.
>> None of the other 3rd party repos did that at the time, and we kept
>> our promise to maintain this for users and I’ve been doing this since
>> 4.3/4.4 timeframe, including any security advisory that was needed via our
>> blogs (for example, ghost/poodle systemvmtemplate updates etc).
>>
>> - We also wanted to share our custom patches which were simply
>> packages built from official releases with additional/critical bug
>> fixes, the value we produced for our customers here was the ability
>> to get such packages and we thought it would be good to share them
>> with users and community
>>
>> - We also wanted to share custom packages that were backported
>> features on official releases and that were aimed to be future
>> upgrade-able to upstream packages (for example, saml+quota on 4.5
>> release at http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/custom, and users
>> can upgrade to
>> 4.6/4.7 in future). A popular reason is that, users won’t really
>> upgrade to major releases just because they are out, typically I’ve
>> seen users upgrade once or twice a year, while some users really
>> avoid upgrading at all and but would prefer upgrading to minor
>> releases (a reason why we maintain old branches or do minor releases).
>>
>> - Information was always available here on whom to contact, sponsors
>> of the repos etc: http://packages.shapeblue.com/README.txt and recently here:
>> http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/README.txt. I’ve personally
>> received several email regarding the repository and have been
>> supporting users both privately if they would email me personally, or on
>> users@ ML.
>>
>> - We also allow people to mirror our repos via rsync: (try rsync
>> rsync://packages.shapeblue.com), here a mirror hosted by Lucian:
>> http://mirrors.coreix.net/packages.shapeblue.com (Lucian mirrors
>> several 3rd party repos including cloudstack.apt-get one),
>> http://mirror.bhaisaab.org (this for example is faster for Asian
>> geographies)
>>
>> - The ShapeBlue provided repo is too maintained by members of the
>> community who happen to be affiliated with one company but that does
>> not make it better or worse than others
>>
>> - The repository link was added about a year ago by myself on the old
>> site (apache cms based system, before we moved to
>> github/middleman/asf-site based
>> publishing) as a convenience to users. The
>> shapeblue.com/packages<http://shapeblue.com/packages> page, by
>> default shows information on consuming the upstream packages/repo
>> (noredist builds from official releases with no changes) and we don’t
>> favour or recommend consuming from main or custom or any other repos.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> On 26-Nov-2015, at 3:17 PM, sebgoa
>> <run...@gmail.com<mailto:run...@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Nov 26, 2015, at 7:52 AM, John Burwell
>> <john.burw...@shapeblue.com<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> A conversation emerged on a PR [1] regarding how package repositories
>> should listed on the downloads page [2]. This PR was prompted by a
>> change on the page which removed reference to the ShapeBlue repositories.
>>
>> Let me touch base with Pierre-Luc to see what happened. It seems he
>> removed it, but he is also the one who added it in the first place.
>>
>> The PR proposes listing all "3rd-Party Distributions" in a separate
>> section in the same manner as the Apache Cassandra [3] project —
>> clearly stating that the package repositories are not endorsed by the
>> community. Objections were raised that the
>> apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/><http://apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/>>
>> repository is a “blessed” community repository, and therefore, not a
>> third party repository. To the best of my knowledge (and my ability
>> to search the mailing list archives), I can not find a vote that
>> changed the project deliverables to include distribution packages or
>> a particular repository for them.
>>
>> There was no vote on this, and we should not get down that path of
>> arguing about whether apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/> is blessed or not.
>>
>> Very early when CloudStack arrived at apache, Wido started hosting
>> packages and has kept doing it, on his own time on his own budget. He
>> has been kind enough to give access to the server to a few of us and
>> can give access to people who request it.
>>
>> Hence this evolved as the "community repo".
>>
>> However since we only vote on source, we do not vote on packages and
>> we should not say that this "community repo" is a blessed repo (there
>> is a bit of grey area here).
>>
>> We have always said that this is a community maintained repo in
>> contrary to an official ASF repo.
>>
>>
>> Furthermore, the vote for 4.6.0 was only for the source deliverable —
>> not distribution packages. As such the packages contained in the
>> apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/><http://apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/>>
>> repository are no more “blessed” or endorsed than any other packages
>> distributed by other parties.
>>
>>
>> They are not blessed (as voted on), but have grown organically to be
>> maintained by several folks with different affiliations.
>>
>> In my opinion, favoring one 3rd-party repository over another is
>> detrimental to the community. We should either list all maintained
>> 3rd-party package
>> repositories or we should list none at all. By maintained, I mean a
>> repository that meets the following criteria:
>>
>> * All contained packages are built from project release tags
>> * The packages contained in the repository are up-to-date with latest
>> release
>> tags
>>
>> The only variations in the packages across “maintained” repositories
>> should be the plugins from the CloudStack source tree included in the
>> package. In order to be listed on the downloads page, a repository
>> must meet this definition and provide a brief description of the
>> repository’s purpose.
>>
>> Some on the PR discussion asked about the purpose and composition of
>> the packages in the ShapeBlue repository. The packages in the
>> ShapeBlue repository are noredist builds of community release tags.
>>
>> Remembering when Rohit started this, (as he happened to be at my
>> house couple times during that timeframe), the idea that triggered
>> this was to start build packages for every commit, not just releases.
>> As well as starting to offer packages that contained hot fixes.
>>
>> They contain no additional patches or changes.
>>
>> This repository was created to provide users with an
>> convenient/familiar way to install the noredist build of a release.
>>
>> Finally, as I have stated elsewhere, I think the project should build
>> distribution packages signed by the project and distributed from
>> official package repositories. However, we must come to a consensus
>> as community this change in deliverables and work out a variety of
>> issues (e.g. supported platforms, repository management, signing,
>> etc) to ensure that users receive well-tested, community voted
>> packages. Finally, it seems like there will be a role for 3rd-party
>> repositories now and in the future. Listing all available 3rd-party
>> repos as I propose would be convenient for users, and ensure fairness to all
>> contributors.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>>
>> [1]: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/20
>> [2]: http://cloudstack.apache.org/downloads.html
>> [3]: http://cassandra.apache.org/download/
>>
>>
>> All in all, as was mentioned by Pierre Luc on the PR, I do not see a
>> problem with listing (on the www download page):
>>
>> * Official source
>> * Community maintained repo (not voted but maintained by more than
>> single
>> vendor)
>> * Third party repo
>>
>> In the rest of the documentation however, I don't think we should be
>> using vendor specific URLs.
>>
>> The only risk with this is the user "confusion" question:
>>
>> - What is different between the repos ?
>> - Which one should I use ?
>> - I used a third party repo, I have a problem who can help me ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> John Burwell (@john_burwell)
>> VP of Software Engineering, ShapeBlue
>> (571) 403-2411 | +44 20 3603 0542
>> http://www.shapeblue.com | @ShapeBlue
>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
>>
>>
>>
>> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related
>> services
>>
>> IaaS Cloud Design &
>> Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
>> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment
>> framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
>> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
>> CloudStack Software
>> Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
>> CloudStack Infrastructure
>> Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
>> CloudStack Bootcamp Training
>> Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
>>
>> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
>> intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
>> addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
>> author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
>> related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this
>> email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor
>> copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe
>> you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
>> incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a
>> company incorporated in India and is operated under license from
>> Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company
>> incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd.
>> ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa
>> and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd.
>> ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
>>
>> Rohit Yadav
>> Software Architect
>>
>> [cid:image003.png@01D122E8.F6EFE910]
>>
>>
>> S: +44 20 3603 0540<tel:+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262
>> 30892<tel:+447770745036>
>>
>> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> |
>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/> |
>> Twitter:@ShapeBlue<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue>
>>
>> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
>>
>> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related
>> services
>>
>> IaaS Cloud Design &
>> Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
>> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment
>> framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
>> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
>> CloudStack Software
>> Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
>> CloudStack Infrastructure
>> Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
>> CloudStack Bootcamp Training
>> Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
>>
>> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
>> intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
>> addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
>> author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
>> related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this
>> email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor
>> copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe
>> you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
>> incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a
>> company incorporated in India and is operated under license from
>> Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company
>> incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd.
>> ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa
>> and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd.
>> ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Software
Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
CloudStack Infrastructure
Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or
opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the
intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon
its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you
believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company
incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape
Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is
operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company
registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from
Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
