On 14/01/13 18:15, Charlie Brady wrote: > > > I don't think those timelines are necessary, or realistic.
Better to have a plan than no plan. Fail to plan, plan to fail ? It can always be amended. Either way, as a first step I would agree with Hsing-Foo on moving to 6.x asap. > >> a. What do we need >> b. Who do we need > > I think that depends on how it is done. I suspect the existing > contribs.org infrastructure is over-heavy for what we do. The tools in use > are designed for building Fedora. I think we can use something more > lightweight. > > If we do things as we currently do, then we need buy in from Shad and his > various deputies. He probably already has a 64bit CentOS 6 build farm, but > we'd need to know that for sure. > > If we do things differently, we need to plan that from scratch. You said "I know from work I have done at Mitel that moving the code to a CentOS6 base is not a hugely difficult task." I don't have the knowledge or experience to quantify this, but it is something that needs quantifying. I presume that if we use the current system, it will be quicker in the short term, but possibly more costly, whereas 'lightening' the system means building a new 'development environment' first, which would take time, but possibly is cheaper and easier/faster to use ? For us mortals, would you care to outline things a little more and what sort of time frames might be involved for the options mentioned ? B. Rgds, John The man who can't even SPELL Future !!!!! _______________________________________________ Discussion about project organisation and overall direction To unsubscribe, e-mail [email protected] Searchable archive at http://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
