On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 12:52 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: > Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 18:57 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > > >>>I kind of like this idea, however, I think it's idealistic. Patches need > >>>to be modified very frequently. Especially when we combine multiple > >>>patches and make them all work with USE flags. > >>> > >>>A great deal of our patches really are written specifically work with our > >>>ebuilds. > >>> > >>>What is the real percentage of space usage from compressed or uncompressed > >>>patches? How big of a problem is it? > >>> > >> > >>Also the problem is that especially if you have a rapid changing > >>package, where the patches changes a lot, putting it in distfiles is a > >>pita, as you have to scp it, then wait an hour to 3 depending on how > >>lucky you are, and then only commit. And especially if you forgetful > >>like me, you tend to forget to either come back and commit the new > >>version/revision, or to copy the new tarball to distfiles ... > > > > > > This was why we were asking for a "packages.gentoo.org" that could > > either be a single or multiple machines. It could even replace > > the /space/distfiles-local, as everything from it could be pushed out to > > be synched to distfiles. This would make them immediately available, > > and would alleviate the problem. Once the main distfiles mirrors got > > the files, they could be deleted from packages.gentoo.org > > You mean patches.gentoo.org. Yes, ideally this is something we need to setup. > I > recall having this topic a few months back, but I forgot where it left off. > Right now dev.g.o is a single point of failure. If it dies, everything you > host > there dies. >
Well, missed this - I am all for it when some infra monkey gets the time :) -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
