>>>>> Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> writes:
> On Jun 11, 2012, at 01:54 PM, Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>> It's unclear to me that we are *known* as a primary consumer.
>>
>> It's clear that we need fixes faster. Being able to report better bugs
>> should helps us getting there and also make us known as a primary
>> consumer.
>>
>> > And it provides better service to Ubuntu developers if we can turn
>> > around an upgrade of that sort of thing without communication
>> > across a Dev/Ops boundary.
>>
>> I agree with this goal too.
>>
>> For the record, I have a trivial fix for pristine-xz that address 2
>> failures and a wip that could well fix the ~140 left on quantal.
> Foundations team had a brief discussion about this today, and we'd
> love to get this fixed. For example, we were looking at
> packagekit, which is out-of-date because of this problem.
> If I'm reading the thread correctly, the choices are roughly
> between upgrading jubany to precise and backporting pristine-tar
> and xz-utils (and their dependencies) to precise, or in some way
> getting the importer running on quantal.
Yup, inside an lxc container.
> We're in favor of whichever approach can be accomplished quickest
> and gives us the highest probability of long-term importer
> improvement and success :).
Reaching the long-term improvement (from which success is derived ;)
means reducing the time between a new pristine-tar (xz, whatever)
upstream version usable by the importer.
Backporting any package so it becomes available on jubany requires (as
of today):
1 - backporting to lucid,
2 - providing the lucid package in a ppa,
3 - ask losas/gsas to test it on jubany (requires restarting the importer
and waiting for it to process one or several imports successfully),
4 - uninstalling the package from jubany,
5 - make it available to the -cat ppas (used on all data center machines
and as such requires to be low risk and without fallouts for other
uses),
6 - installing on jubany (and restart the importer).
Using a quantal lxc container will allow:
1 - Benefit from quantal packages (more recent versions available at no
cost),
2 - Use the same environment for testing and production,
3 - Remove the constraint to be accepted into the -cat archives. This
is, IMHO, the main benefit as it reconciles -cat maintainers and udd
maintainers constraints.
> If it helps, one of our guys would be willing to help backport
> some packages to precise, but I'll let him speak for himself. :)
Thanks for the offer !
I'm a bit reluctant to backport pristine-tar and friends because:
- I already did it twice in the past (1.17 and 1.20),
- pristine-tar just released a newer version (1.25) (including a fix for
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677241). Had I
backported 1.24 that would have been a net loss.
- I'm already running successful tests inside a quantal lxc container :)
Vincent
--
ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list
ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
