Vladimir Marek wrote:
>> And though that site would probably be
>> on opensolaris.org where we'd keep all the tar files to make sure
>> they don't disappear and that builds aren't subject to 56 different
>> ftp sites staying up all the time, that turns one putback into two -
>> first drop your tar file in, then you can putback - and that worries
>> me. But perhaps I'm the only one.
>
> Imagine it other way around. You would specify source url in your change
> to the product (being it sourceforge or anything) and our mirror would
> automatically pull the source later. But I'm dreaming too much ahead
> here.
That way would mean that the gate doesn't compile until sometime
later. That tends to be seen as 'bad' because people putting back
after you and trying to make sure they didn't break anything lose
time debugging what is not their fault.
And I think we'd have to have our own copies, since due to licensing
concerns we have to be able to provide it for years, and in any event
years from now we may need to get that old version to try to fix
a bug and what if it has been pulled from the original site? (you
may have meant that too when you said 'mirror' but that can mean
you'd mirror upstream deletions too).
>> My concerns are failed builds and now having to coordinate two
>> putbacks (and that not involving me having to wake up at 3am to copy
>> someones tar file :).
>
> Well, with hg you can always return to history, to a non-broken state.
Which is cool, but still means people are broken until the gate is
repaired no matter how easy it is. Believe me I have those issues now :)
>
>> In that case, ignore my 102 target and go figure out your target :)
>
>
> Being just few days here on the list, I feel to shy to suggest things.
you can always suggest things.
> Would be good to know what we want to achieve. "Make contribution as
> easy as possible" might be one goal. What about starting thread 'what
> could be better on sfw gate' to get idea about where could we improve
> things ?
feel free.
Mike
