Where will it live

Where will it live

[Ian Kent]

Hi all,

Soon there will be a release of autofs-4.0.0 and shortly after 
autofs-4.1.0-beta1.

This raises the question of where the packages should live. There is 
also the question of whether we should have a CVS repository available.

Comments/suggestions/offers please?

-- 

   ,-._|\    Ian Kent
  /      \   Perth, Western Australia
  *_.--._/   E-mail: raven@themaw.net
        v    Web: http://themaw.net/

Re: Where will it live?

[Ian McLeod]

Ian,

Any objections to hosting it at SourceForge?

That would give you CVS as well as the ability to do formal and beta 
releases.

-Ian


On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ian Kent wrote:

> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Soon there will be a release of autofs-4.0.0 and shortly after 
> autofs-4.1.0-beta1.
> 
> This raises the question of where the packages should live. There is 
> also the question of whether we should have a CVS repository available.
> 
> Comments/suggestions/offers please?
> 
> 

Re: Where will it live

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 06:25, Ian Kent wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Soon there will be a release of autofs-4.0.0 and shortly after 
> autofs-4.1.0-beta1.
> 
> This raises the question of where the packages should live. There is 
> also the question of whether we should have a CVS repository available.
> 
> Comments/suggestions/offers please?

I was thinking about hosting it on bkbits.  I've been using BK for other
projects lately, and it is very nice.  SF has been a bit of a dog
lately, particularly for anon-CVS.

	J

Re: Re: Where will it live

[Alvin Oga]

hi ya

hosting space could be anywhere .... 

it's best to keep ones own copy ?? of it .. let others mirror it

c ya
alvin

- am against sourceforge .. too big ... too messy to d/l
  but might be good for bugtracking etc etc..

	- release area does not need to be the same as development code

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 06:25, Ian Kent wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Soon there will be a release of autofs-4.0.0 and shortly after 
> > autofs-4.1.0-beta1.
> > 
> > This raises the question of where the packages should live. There is 
> > also the question of whether we should have a CVS repository available.
> > 
> > Comments/suggestions/offers please?
> 
> I was thinking about hosting it on bkbits.  I've been using BK for other
> projects lately, and it is very nice.  SF has been a bit of a dog
> lately, particularly for anon-CVS.
> 

Re: Re: Where will it live

[H. Peter Anvin]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 06:25, Ian Kent wrote:
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Soon there will be a release of autofs-4.0.0 and shortly after 
>>autofs-4.1.0-beta1.
>>
>>This raises the question of where the packages should live. There is 
>>also the question of whether we should have a CVS repository available.
>>
>>Comments/suggestions/offers please?
> 
> I was thinking about hosting it on bkbits.  I've been using BK for other
> projects lately, and it is very nice.  SF has been a bit of a dog
> lately, particularly for anon-CVS.
> 

You're also locking out potential developers, due to LM's "if I don't
like you you can't use it" license clause.

Agreed with SF being slow for anoncvs.  There is also Savannah
(savannah.gnu.org/savannah.nongnu.org).

Obviously for posting packages there is kernel.org, as before;
unfortunately we don't really have the human resources at this time to
set up SCM repositories.

	-hpa

Re: Re: Where will it live

[Alvin Oga]

hi ya

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Obviously for posting packages there is kernel.org, as before;
> unfortunately we don't really have the human resources at this time to
> set up SCM repositories.

i'd be more than happy to spend time and drop a machine off
to be autofs.kernel.org  ...
	( have plenty of spare 1U boxes - used for testing )

and configure anoncvs ... i havent done that yet .. ( the
challenge/fun/frustation )

c ya
alvin

Re: Re: Where will it live

[H. Peter Anvin]

Alvin Oga wrote:
> hi ya
> 
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> 
>>Obviously for posting packages there is kernel.org, as before;
>>unfortunately we don't really have the human resources at this time to
>>set up SCM repositories.
> 
> 
> i'd be more than happy to spend time and drop a machine off
> to be autofs.kernel.org  ...
> 	( have plenty of spare 1U boxes - used for testing )
> 
> and configure anoncvs ... i havent done that yet .. ( the
> challenge/fun/frustation )
> 

I guess what we'd really need is cvs.kernel.org for all kinds of
different projects.

Here is probably not the best option for hosting if you are going to
maintain it, but I think I have a solution to that.  Let me get back to
you next week if there is interest, ok?

	-hpa

Re: Re: Where will it live

[Ian Kent]

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Alvin Oga wrote:
> > hi ya
> > 
> > On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Obviously for posting packages there is kernel.org, as before;
> >>unfortunately we don't really have the human resources at this time to
> >>set up SCM repositories.
> > 
> > 
> > i'd be more than happy to spend time and drop a machine off
> > to be autofs.kernel.org  ...
> > 	( have plenty of spare 1U boxes - used for testing )
> > 
> > and configure anoncvs ... i havent done that yet .. ( the
> > challenge/fun/frustation )
> > 
> 
> I guess what we'd really need is cvs.kernel.org for all kinds of
> different projects.
> 
> Here is probably not the best option for hosting if you are going to
> maintain it, but I think I have a solution to that.  Let me get back to
> you next week if there is interest, ok?
> 

I have a few thoughts on the discussion.

Firstly I think it goes without saying we need to maintain an up to date 
copy of the tarballs on kernel.org. Everyone expects it to be there and 
the authoritative autofs release packages should all be in the same place 
in at least one location.

I have not used CVS much. We use SCCS for most of our admin and utility 
scripts at work. The function is the same so the issues are the same.

I will maintain a 'mostly not working' CVS on my little co-lo machine 
anyway as I need to be able to grab it when I can't get onto my computer 
'cause the kids have kicked me of mine' but that's another story.

Forgive me for stating the obvious. But for completeness I will.

The big issues here are the CVS repository needs care and feeding and 
backup. This is trivial for a few small packages such as autofs but these 
things have a tendency to grow without bound when you least expect them 
to. This becomes important for development when CVS becomes the 'place 
the distribution lives' for dif comparison and bug hunting etc.

Although we don't expect much traffic, it is possible that at times 
considerable download volumes may occur which of course means dollars.

The point being we shouldn't take the amount of effort needed to keep it 
available and maintain it lightly.

I think that one of the public CVS repositories would be best for these 
reasons but ...

Peter clearly has a different need and it would be great if we could 
establish cvs.kernel.org. However I think we would need a sponsor for 
this.

Thanks for your kind offer Alvin. Maybe you will be the sponsor.

-- 

   ,-._|\    Ian Kent
  /      \   Perth, Western Australia
  *_.--._/   E-mail: raven@themaw.net
        v    Web: http://themaw.net/