[csw-maintainers] Preview of the new mirror structure available

[James Lee]

On 05/11/09, 16:16:42, Dagobert Michelsen wrote regarding
[csw-maintainers] Preview of the new mirror structure available:

Is this a preview or a proposal?


> opencsw/
> experimental/
> /
> pkgs/ (confined to this directory)
> mytest.pkg.gz
> sparc/
> 5.8/
> mytest.pkg.gz (hardlinked to pkgs/mytest.pkg.gz)

> testing/
> pkgs/
> sparc/
> 5.8/

Too complex and risky to be of any use to *users*.


> distribution/
> allcatalogs/
> catalog-sparc-5.8-20091002
> allpkgs/
> mypkg.tar.gz

This looks as if your proposal is to formalise the retention of all
packages and catalogues (a collection's state).  At first this seems
like a good idea but think deeper and you will see that if all
catalogues are kept there is no way of knowing which are erroneous,
hence they all become useless.  Actually there is a way of knowing
because we keep the known good sets as stable releases which is
already handled.




> stable/
> sparc/
> 5.8/
> current/
> sparc/
> 5.8/
> pkg.tar.gz (also hardlinked from allpkgs)
> freeze/
> current-20091002/
> README.20091002
> sparc/
> 5.8/
> catalog
> pkg.tar.gz (hardlinked from allpkgs)
> 5.9/
> pkg.tar.gz (symlinked to 5.8, same as in current/)

This misunderstands the WIP nature of the snapshot process.  The freeze
is on unstable, it's not an entity it's unstable itself that is frozen.




> ** TBD: experimental/ should be filled with the subdirectories from
> what is now in testing/.
> Subdirectories can be created by each maintainer and for each
> folder a subproject
> is created in experimental which can be synced to separately.

> ** TBD: packages/ can the go from experimental/ to testing/ when no
> open issues persist.

How will you define "no open issues persist"?


> This can be used to drive servers. Only packages proven there can
> go to current/. See
> http://wiki.opencsw.org/automated-release-process
> for details.

Here you draw parity to the Debian system.  Previous discussion concluded
the levels you show are not correct.

"How stuff gets in there", conceptually and practically it doesn't
because stable is a modified clone of another state done as an atomic
operation.

I feel we've lost sight of the aims of the proposal.




James.