[csw-maintainers] progress report
rupert at opencsw.org
Wed Jul 20 18:03:15 CEST 2011
What is the plan for the packages maintained by phil?
> Am 20.07.2011 16:12 schrieb "Maciej Bliziński" <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> > Em 20/07/2011 03:10, "Ben Walton" <bwalton at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> >> Hi All,
> >> At this point, I'm fairly happy with the gpg signing daemon. You
> >> should be able to request a signed (with a dummy key) catalog on the
> >> buildfarm by doing:
> >> curl -s
> >> http://192.168.1.40:9981/clearsign/opencsw-future/unstable/i386/5.9
> >> Valid urls for the daemon are:
> >> /(clearsign|detachsign)/(opencsw|opencsw-future)/(unstable|current)/...
> >> Give it a kick and see for yourself.
> >> The code is in a git repository:
> >> gitosis at mirror.opencsw.org:cswsign.git
> >> We don't have gitweb enabled there, but if you want access, I'll add
> >> your public key so you can check it out. We could host this in the
> >> github/opencsw framework that Rupert has been working on if that's
> >> considered better (likely).
> >> Additionally, I've written a basic script to integrate this feature
> >> with the script that is currently generating the catalogs for
> >> opencsw-future/unstable. I still need to plug it in, but the basics
> >> are in place now.
> >> The remaining pieces for automated signing are:
> >> 1. Enable outbound mail notification from cswsign on the buildfarm.
> >> 2. Integrate the generate-catalog script into generate-unstable.
> >> 3. Activate.
> >> This will leave two major automation tasks remaining:
> >> 1. Mantis integration.
> >> 2. Promotion from unstable to current. (depends on 1)
> >> If I understand correctly, Maciej re-integrated current and unstable
> >> before leaving for vacation. That means that packages newly pushed to
> >> unstable can (when #2 is ready) be promoted as appropriate to current.
> > Yes, I have integrated unstable into dublin. I'll explain a bit about
> > organized catalogs, so that we all use the same terminology. If anyone
> > objects to the way I did it, please say. Here go the details.
> > There are 2 places that hold catalog information: files on disk, visible
> > mirror.opencsw.org, and the buildfarm database, visible through
> > buildfarm.opencsw.org. Information migration is possible in both
> > directions. On the disk, there are two places, 'opencsw' and
> > 'opencsw-future'. They also differ. 'opencsw' represents the old state
> > the last time the former release manager touched it. 'opencsw-future'
> > the proposed new structure.
> > Some catalogs are the same in both places, for example unstable and
> > However, some aren't, notably current is not the same in opencsw-future
> > in the DB.
> > In opencsw-future, we integrate from unstable into a named release.
> > Currently, the named release is "dublin". We also talked about
> > opencsw-future, testing is (can be) an alias for the named release we're
> > currently working on.
> > There is no concept of an alias in the database. That's why there is no
> > "testing" there.
> > We provide the URL ending in "current" for backward compatibility. There
> > also a catalog named "current" in the database, but it contains a
> > of current on the official mirror. Perhaps we should rename it (in the
> > to "current-legacy" to make it explicit that it is not what we serve
> > .../opencsw-future/current/.
> > Back to catalog signing, I suggest that we say "we sign unstable and
> > or "we sign unstable and testing". Let "current" become a term denoting
> > legacy URL.
> > I hope it makes sense to you. If it doesn't, or you need more
> > please say.
> > I am excited about the upcoming signing automation. I feel we are close
> > completing the new workflow which will make it easy to move forward. We
> > a number of new ideas in the pipeline, from me it will be new Python
> > versions, reworked PostgreSQL and new MySQL version.
> > Maciej
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the maintainers