Re: [PATCH v11 0/9] rutabaga_gfx + gfxstream

[Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2786 bytes --]

Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> writes:

> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:11 AM Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is> wrote:
>
>> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 4:07 AM Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > - Official "release commits" issued for rutabaga_gfx_ffi,
>> >> >   gfxstream, aemu-base.  For example, see crrev.com/c/4778941
>> >> >
>> >> > - The release commits can make packaging easier, though once
>> >> >   again all known users will likely just build from sources
>> >> >   anyways
>> >>
>> >> It's a small thing, but could there be actual tags, rather than just
>> >> blessed commits?  It'd just make them easier to find, and save a bit of
>> >> time in review for packages.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I added:
>> >
>> >
>> https://crosvm.dev/book/appendix/rutabaga_gfx.html#latest-releases-for-potential-packaging
>> >
>> > Tags are possible, but I want to clarify the use case before packaging.
>> > Where are you thinking of packaging it for (Debian??)? Are you mostly
>> > interested in Wayland passthrough (my guess) or gfxstream too?  Depending
>> > your use case, we may be able to minimize the work involved.
>>
>> Packaging for Nixpkgs (where I already maintain what to my knowledge is
>> the only crosvm distro package).  I'm personally mostly interested in
>> Wayland passthroug, but I wouldn't be surprised if others are interested
>> in gfxstream.  The packaging work is already done, I've just been
>> holding off actually pushing the packages waiting for the stable
>> releases.
>>
>> The reason that tags would be useful is that it allows a reviewer of the
>> package to see at a glance that the package is built from a stable
>> release.  If it's just built from a commit hash, they have to go and
>> verify that it's a stable release, which is mildly annoying and
>> unconventional.
>>
>
> Understood.  Request to have gfxstream and AEMU v0.1.2 release tags made.
>
> For rutabaga_gfx_ffi, is the crates.io upload sufficient?
>
> https://crates.io/crates/rutabaga_gfx_ffi
>
> Debian, for example, treats crates.io as the source of truth and builds
> tooling around that.  I wonder if Nixpkgs as similar tooling around
> crates.io.

We do, and I'll use the crates.io release for the package — good
suggestion, but it's still useful to also have a tag in a git repo.  It
makes it easier if I need to do a bisect, for example.  As a distro
developer, I'm frequently jumping across codebases I am not very
familiar with to try to track down regressions, etc., and it's much
easier when I don't have to learn some special quirk of the package like
not having git tags.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]