James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net writes:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:11:36 +0100, Vincent Ladeuil
vila+...@canonical.com wrote:
3. It would also allow for starting to move udd to an SOA, or at
least
make it easier.
Not a concern for udd so far.
Actually
Martin Pool m...@sourcefrog.net writes:
I think switching from batch html, handcoded sql and ssh access to
higher-level alternatives would be well worth while and Django seems
like a good choice. +1 from me, and also on the specific incremental
changes.
I agree with
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:32:28 +0100, Vincent Ladeuil vila+...@canonical.com
wrote:
True, but I'm not saying your plan is *bad* for udd, quite the
contrary. And yes, sharing some service to query launchpad sounds also
like a good idea (I think I mention adding pkgme to mass_import and
that's
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:38:53 +0100, Vincent Ladeuil vila+...@canonical.com
wrote:
it will be less risky to deploy changes gradually,
Only if we have tested these changes before deployment which we can't do
for now (don't take my word for it, just look at the lp:udd
history). Even my
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:08 AM, James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net wrote:
My plan is delete add-import-jobs, and an a POST handler that gets told
when there are new packages to scan.
'there is work to do now' is a classic pub-sub situation. Rather than
a post handler, I suggest you want
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:09:00 +1300, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:08 AM, James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net
wrote:
My plan is delete add-import-jobs, and an a POST handler that gets told
when there are new packages to scan.
'there is work
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:11:36 +0100, Vincent Ladeuil vila+...@canonical.com
wrote:
3. It would also allow for starting to move udd to an SOA, or at least
make it easier.
Not a concern for udd so far.
Actually I'd like to turn add_import_jobs in to a separate service, as
it
I think switching from batch html, handcoded sql and ssh access to
higher-level alternatives would be well worth while and Django seems
like a good choice. +1 from me, and also on the specific incremental
changes.
I agree with James, and disagree with Vincent, about bringing these
changes in to
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 17:52:40 +1300, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 3:10 PM, James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net
wrote:
Hi,
I think there are a few reasons that we should consider moving udd to
django (more on what this actually means later
should consider moving udd to
django (more on what this actually means later.)
I'm curious what data udd stores.
There are two sets.
There's the bookkeeping data for running import-package each time a
package is uploaded to Debian or Ubuntu, keeping track of failures, etc.
It might
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 06:38:25 +1300, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
It might be interesting - as a thought experiment if nothing else - to
consider failures a form of crash and upload them to a crash database
rather than processing them inside udd - e.g. toss them out over
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 7:19 AM, James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net wrote:
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 06:38:25 +1300, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
It might be interesting - as a thought experiment if nothing else - to
consider failures a form of crash and upload them to a
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 3:10 PM, James Westby jw+deb...@jameswestby.net wrote:
Hi,
I think there are a few reasons that we should consider moving udd to
django (more on what this actually means later.)
I'm curious what data udd stores.
I'm +1000 on moving it towards a service, something
13 matches
Mail list logo
