[OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. - Ken ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
we talked about doing it for releases; this would be a generalized case of it possibly, but i can see it becoming a support nightmare. you're running what?? On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. - Ken ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info -- Derrick ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
At least on Windows, 'no'. The builders have no access to certificates and private keys necessary for digital signatures and do not build either the documentation nor the installation packages. Building complete installation packages would increase the build time by more than a factor of three. Publicly distributed binaries also have symbols and binaries registered with Microsoft which is a very manual process. On Thursday, September 13, 2012 12:21:25 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. - Ken ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
Are there any objections to doing this for non-windows platforms? It could be a nightly build. On 09/13/2012 12:35 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote: we talked about doing it for releases; this would be a generalized case of it possibly, but i can see it becoming a support nightmare. you're running what?? On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
My big concern is that nightly installable builds will be a support nightmare. There are a large number of users that will always take the latest no matter what. I realize there is an argument to be made for users being free to do hang themselves. But I question whether that is what organizational help desks are prepared to support. The real issue that needs to be addressed is how to produce supportable releases on a more frequent basis. In the past the consensus among the gatekeepers has been to move to a biweekly release cycle. Whatever is ready for a given release date gets pulled up and anything that isn't, doesn't. However, this requires having a much greater availability of release management and testing resources. Coupled with the biweekly release schedule, I believe it is important that the web site provide guidance to end users as to which release build is known to be reliable on which platforms. Otherwise, users will always go for the most recent build and frequently end up with something much less reliable than we would prefer. Jeffrey Altman On Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:21:08 PM, Jason Edgecombe wrote: Are there any objections to doing this for non-windows platforms? It could be a nightly build. On 09/13/2012 12:35 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote: we talked about doing it for releases; this would be a generalized case of it possibly, but i can see it becoming a support nightmare. you're running what?? On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
no objection here, esp. if there's anyone out there with the spare time for and interest in testing them. -Original Message- From: ja...@rampaginggeek.com Sent: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:21:08 -0400 To: sha...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages Are there any objections to doing this for non-windows platforms? It could be a nightly build. On 09/13/2012 12:35 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote: we talked about doing it for releases; this would be a generalized case of it possibly, but i can see it becoming a support nightmare. you're running what?? On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
if we do that, nightly (not per patch) builds would be better Derrick On Sep 14, 2012, at 0:59, Chaz Chandler cl...@inbox.com wrote: no objection here, esp. if there's anyone out there with the spare time for and interest in testing them. -Original Message- From: ja...@rampaginggeek.com Sent: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:21:08 -0400 To: sha...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] buildbot and packages Are there any objections to doing this for non-windows platforms? It could be a nightly build. On 09/13/2012 12:35 PM, Derrick Brashear wrote: we talked about doing it for releases; this would be a generalized case of it possibly, but i can see it becoming a support nightmare. you're running what?? On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote: Would it be feasible or desirable to have Buildbot actually provide install-able packages (eg. RPMs on Linux, MSIs on Windows)? It could help new users confirm yes, this change fixes my bug. ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
