Hello Andy, Le sam. 12 nov. 2022 à 02:10, andy pugh <bodge...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > I have asked what the release platform should be, and there wasn't a single > reply.
I'm very sorry that you felt ignored on this. I thought I had expressed my opinion many times, so didn't do it one again... But it remains the same: * Release for Debian Stable, unless Testing freeze has been announced and time frame is short enough that it'd make it almost like releasing for old-stable * Master on Debian Testing Your (perfectly understandable :/ ) renouncement is one sad and hard proof more that we have much more important issues to address than maintaining support for middle age hardware and distributions ! > I will continue as a user and I will continue to offer my support on > the forum and mailing lists, I am not going anywhere, but I am both > ignorant of what the release policy should be and incapable of performing > the release manager role with the accesses and expertise that I have. The way this happens is a major failure for the project as whole that I really wish LinuxCNC will overcome rapidly with a reborn strength... In the meantime, I want to sincerely thank you, Andy, for all your investment and dedication in running this project and hope you'll remain a pillar of our community 🙏🙏🙏 About the Buildbot, I here again ask if the project can and should keep on relying on a self-hosted infrastructure ? I believe that it is too much of a burden for any of the people actively involved in the project ATM, as well as an undesirable dependency and Single Point Of Failure. Our infrastructure should be managed in the open, as is the rest of the project. For all this reasons, I think we should adopt some kind of Infrastructure as Code strategy and move our Continuous Integration, Deployment and repository hosting to Open Source friendly Cloud solutions, if not Open Source SaaS if available. I spent a few hours looking for options. Sadly, I couldn't find any hosted Buildbot offering. First option could be to replace the buildbot with GitHub Actions, probably using Docker container actions to build on Debian and not Ubuntu, and then pushing packages to some artifact hosting service like https://packagecloud.io/l/apt-repository. We could also, like many other Open Source projects, use Travis CI (easing the way back to buildbot with buildbot-travis compatibility layer), or CircleCI, or any of the small dozen of significant players in that field. For an Open Source SaaS option, the most integrated option would be GitLab CI/CD, again with a package hosting. Following the principles that have driven the choice of po4a+Weblate for translations management, migrating to GitLab would be the best option. Finally, https://www.drone.io is available in SaaS form through https://harness.io/products/continuous-integration. TY J _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
