Hi all, (I apologize, there isn't much structure to this email)
I wanted to create a thread to discuss release engineering on our install media. What the processes are when creating those releases, how we test them, and what changes we want to make. In my view, there are 3 install classes of install images: - x86 ISOs - iPXE images (we don't currently make these, and it is blocking and update of ParabolaWeb) - ARM images (we don't currently make these, and we totally should) Changes I've made - I've re-added the 'latest' symlink in the '/iso/' folder on repo. - I've merge the '/iso-previous/' folder on repo back in to '/iso/'. There's no need to split them off. Changes I'm doing - Adjusting repoindex and parabolaweb so that parabolaweb's `syncisos` command works (and add that to the crontab), so that our releases show up at https://www.parabola.nu/releng/releases/ and https://www.parabola.nu/releng/releases/ Things I'm concerned about: - Do we put the sourceballs on the install CD? If not, do we ensure that sourceballs for old packages don't get cleaned up if that package is on a CD we still publish? - `archboot` is a testing replacement for `archiso`. Do we have any plans to ditch `parabolaiso` for a `parabolaboot`? - I think it would be really cool if any files not owned by a package or modified from the vanilla version on the install media were managed by [holo][]. - Bill Auger tells me that parabolaiso requires root. I'd like to understand why. Can we use unprivileged user/mount namespaces to avoid this on the build server? - I think the release process should be more documented, and more automated (FOSS automation scripts are the best form of process documentation :P) [holo]: http://holocm.org/ That said, install media creation is the part of Parabola that I am most removed from and ignorant to. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.parabola.nu https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev