> On 28 Feb 2017, at 12:49, Barak Korren <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 February 2017 at 13:04, Michal Skrivanek > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Don’t we have a cache around it? >> whitelist is hard to maintain. We do not track every packaging change in >> CentOS >> > > Yes it is cached, but even with a cache CentOS contains mountains of > stuff we don't need and just slows things down. An yes, the white list > can be hard to maintain. > > The thing is that the way OST is built currently it pre-syncs > everything it needs and then runs the tests themselves offline.
Shouldn’t be a problem to have a full cache of all CentOS packages on the same host or somewhere close for CI. We do not need a different sync for subsequent runs. > Because of this we need to maintain lists of what is needed anyway. > This offline operation feature is something some people find very > useful, so we're probably not going to remove it any time soon, No, I wouldn’t want to remove that. Sure. But if it keeps the cache then why would it take a long time to sync once you do the initial first run? > despite the difficulty of maintaining the white lists. > > -- > Barak Korren > [email protected] > RHCE, RHCi, RHV-DevOps Team > https://ifireball.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
