Re: concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
On 2015-02-12 13:52, Luca Falavigna wrote: > Hi, > > 2015-02-11 20:46 GMT+01:00 Peter Palfrader : >> It seems the buildd team is severely understaffed and needs help. > > If this rumor turns to be a reality, are there some prerequisites > potential volunteers could have a look to in the event they want to > apply for the role? > > Cheers, > Luca > > Hi, >From what I gathered from IRC, the requirements are the "same as any other core team" (i.e. "DD-only"?). I suppose "way too much time and tons of motivation" will be a great plus. :> ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54e397ea.5030...@thykier.net
Re: concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
On 2015-02-12 22:18, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2015-02-12 13:02, Holger Levsen wrote: >>> Possible avenues include updating the forks and working on making the >>> forks >>> no longer necessary. >> are these forks maintained in VCSs? > > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/buildd-tools/sbuild.git/log/?h=buildd-0.64 > > Historically forks have been needed because fixes in stable are hard. If > stuff breaks in testing or unstable you usually need to fix it quicker > than with a point release. A point could be made that the changes should > be pushed to stable instead. > > As far as I know there's also still no builddadm-maintainable puppet > tree. (Partly my fault I acknowledge, because I hoped to be able to do > rabbitmq, but failed working against a black box I don't understand.) If > we could ship the relevant helper scripts through Puppet (and unify > configuration) we could also make most of the fork moot and just > cherry-pick new versions from testing. > > Kind regards > Philipp Kern > > For reference, Ansgar (CC'ed) have started to merge the branches (see [1]). I believe his short-term plan was to merge the general stuff into master, have that uploaded to unstable and then do a buildd specific version with the remaining Debian-specific parts. In the long term, we should definitely aim for having exactly one implementation of sbuild. We might need to optimise some of the processes for this to work. I believe DSA are usually happy with pulling from either proposed-updates and backports, so we should be able to find a suitable solution for getting timely fixes available on the Debian machines. Thanks, ~Niels [1] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/ansgar/sbuild.git/log/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54dda8ee.6080...@thykier.net
Re: concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
On 2015-02-12 13:02, Holger Levsen wrote: Possible avenues include updating the forks and working on making the forks no longer necessary. are these forks maintained in VCSs? http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/buildd-tools/sbuild.git/log/?h=buildd-0.64 Historically forks have been needed because fixes in stable are hard. If stuff breaks in testing or unstable you usually need to fix it quicker than with a point release. A point could be made that the changes should be pushed to stable instead. As far as I know there's also still no builddadm-maintainable puppet tree. (Partly my fault I acknowledge, because I hoped to be able to do rabbitmq, but failed working against a black box I don't understand.) If we could ship the relevant helper scripts through Puppet (and unify configuration) we could also make most of the fork moot and just cherry-pick new versions from testing. Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/50e1ae2a77c3a7450871ca08b280e...@hub.kern.lc
Re: concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
Hi, 2015-02-11 20:46 GMT+01:00 Peter Palfrader : > It seems the buildd team is severely understaffed and needs help. If this rumor turns to be a reality, are there some prerequisites potential volunteers could have a look to in the event they want to apply for the role? Cheers, Luca -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cadk7b0o_ehd36evqf08j1sjocg7e1u8mrnuw4p9f9z0xwet...@mail.gmail.com
Re: concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
Hi, On Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2015, Peter Palfrader wrote: > The Debian buildd network uses a fork of the buildd and sbuild packages > instead of the packages we ship in the archive. are the bugs about these issues? > These packages, maintained by the builddadm team are shipped via > buildd.debian.org. Currently, they don't install cleanly and out of the > box on jessie systems. are the bugs about these issues? > Possible avenues include updating the forks and working on making the forks > no longer necessary. are these forks maintained in VCSs? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
concerns about the state of buildds for jessie
Hi, DSA is concerned about the current state of our buildd's readyness for jessie. The Debian buildd network uses a fork of the buildd and sbuild packages instead of the packages we ship in the archive. The reasons why we are still doing that are not entirely clear, but that's the status quo. These packages, maintained by the builddadm team are shipped via buildd.debian.org. Currently, they don't install cleanly and out of the box on jessie systems. DSA has been wanting to move more of our buildd systems to jessie since late last year, but the fact that the tools we need do not work cleanly there yet prevents that. It seems the buildd team is severely understaffed and needs help. Possible avenues include updating the forks and working on making the forks no longer necessary. Cheers, -- | .''`. ** Debian ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `-http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150211194630.gj18...@anguilla.noreply.org
