On Fri, 7 May 2010 12:13:33 -0500, Aaron Griffin <[email protected]> wrote: > So in effect, it seems we're saying the same things, except I am using > REPO_NAME="foo-rebuild" for each rebuild "foo", and you are using > REPO_NAME="staging" for *all* rebuilds.
Somehow yes, but the detail is quite important. But a already existing repo will make things a lot easier. Maybe its worth to manually create a separate repo but probably not for just a few. We also sometimes upload packages somewhere to share or let others grab them from our home dirs on gerolde. Such a repo would simplify this and induce a general work flow for e.g. rebuilds. But still, the main intention is to make testing more usable to get more feedback and in turn have less bugs in core/extra. > This can already be done, the staging dir just needs to be added to the > server. > > It would, however, need to be excluded from rsync if you want that. Sure, the implementation of this is a peace of cake: mostly a mkdir and maybe adding some shortcuts to devtools and dbscripts to have something like stagingpkg and staging2extra etc.. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
