On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 03:30PM, Evans Ye wrote: > Guys I've a bad news. > I'm guessing that our official released 1.0 repos on S3 are also tied with > Cloudera's credentials, which is why we no longer have S3 repos available > for users to consume now(I've tried centos6 and debian8). > That's really bad in user experience. :( > Cos, > * Could you please confirm where we put 1.0 repos on? > * If my guess is right, do you still have copies of signed repos at local > for restore?
I do have the copy of the repos, so it should be an easy exercise to restore them to the new location. > * I don't have knowledge of how our current S3 resources are being managed. > And we don't have S3 resources available from Tom's team, hence I think we > need to plan for this now. > > Evans On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 10:53AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > Since the binary convenience artifacts are not an official release artifact, > only the source tarball is, then any of us can feel free to use the official > 1.0 release tarball to generate a new set of packages, store them at new > locations, and update pointers to that location. > > The new location *could* be Apache dist. Other projects host their > convenience artifacts there. We need to consider the impact on > infrastructure costs. I don't think there would be any significant impact. > We could mail infrastructure to find out if they have any concerns given the > space requirement if you prefer this option. We have discussed it with INFRA in the early days of the project. And precisely the cost impact was the reason we have kept it elsewhere. We are talking about ~0.7GB/repo x 5 platforms (at least) x number of Apache mirrors - it's pretty huge, really. > Bintray is another option. I don't know anything about it. > > I also looked at creating a S3 bucket for Bigtop using my account. I have a > feeling monthly transfer charges will not be a problem. However the 'bigtop' > bucket is taken. Perhaps we could talk to Tom about getting ownership > transferred if you prefer this option. We need to ask Cloudera's infra team to transfer it to us. Sean, could you figure out how this can be done? Thanks! Cos > > On Oct 18, 2015, at 4:42 AM, Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Cos, > > > > Is it correct that we should not put our release artifacts on apache dist, > > since Apache is about code not binaries? > > > > Can we use something like bintray.org ? Looks like the functionality we > > need: RPM and DEB repo, and does have an API. > > > > Olaf > > > > > > > > > >> Am 18.10.2015 um 09:30 schrieb Evans Ye <[email protected]>: > >> > >> Guys I've a bad news. > >> I'm guessing that our official released 1.0 repos on S3 are also tied with > >> Cloudera's credentials, which is why we no longer have S3 repos available > >> for users to consume now(I've tried centos6 and debian8). > >> That's really bad in user experience. :( > >> Cos, > >> * Could you please confirm where we put 1.0 repos on? > >> * If my guess is right, do you still have copies of signed repos at local > >> for restore? > >> * I don't have knowledge of how our current S3 resources are being managed. > >> And we don't have S3 resources available from Tom's team, hence I think we > >> need to plan for this now. > >> > >> Evans > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
