> On 14 Nov 2014, at 17:38 , Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 14 Nov 2014, at 14:01 , Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Also, the tarball, are we good to simply zip up the couchdb.git repo after >>> ./configure? Or would all users run ./configure? My main concern is of >>> course the time to setup, as cloning all the small repos tends to take some >>> time. If there are things that are tied to the Erlang version of the person >>> who runs ./configure, then we can’t circumvent this (without some extra >>> work). Can anyone shed some light on this? Thanks! :) >> >> In case of no ./configure usage e.g. all deps are included we couldn't >> provide any fixes just in time. > > that’s a great point > >> But the preview will be in safe if we'll broke something (: > > and we’ll have more people tell us :D > > I’m just worried about this because asfgit was rather slow this past few > weeks, to the point of erroring out during configure. > > Maybe we switch this to the GitHub mirror for the preview? > > Here’s a cursory comparison: > > ASF: > > > GitHub: >> time ./configure > real 2m21.935s > user 0m12.495s > sys 0m10.272s > > git-wip-us: >> time ./configure > real 9m40.581s > user 0m12.512s > sys 0m10.535s
Current attempts at providing a tarball without all the .git directories shows that our current system isn’t really set up to be build from a source-only release: make ERROR: sh(git describe --always --tags) failed with return code 128 and the following output: fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git Any suggestions as what to do? If there is no easy solution, the two options for Monday are: 1. a tarball with all .git directories included (~70MB .tgz or .tbz) 2. Or the installation instructions are pointing at our git repo. Currently leaning towards #2, but would love to hear everyone’s input. Best Jan --
