I have some unused powerfull servers which could be used for the process to import F13 packages. Do you think i can start the process myself ?
Envoyé de mon iPhone Le 3 mai 2010 à 20:22, "Michael K. Johnson" <johns...@rpath.com> a écrit : > On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 10:28:52PM +0200, Bertrand Juglas wrote: >> Now i'm a RHCE (RedHat Certified Engineer) and Fedora Ambassador so >> I've more reasons to help mirrorball with Fedora bodhi integration. >> My >> french Fedora mentor is one of the bodhi dev so i can ask him if i >> have questions. So ping me if you don't see news about bodhi support >> for mirrorball before the end of the month. > > Sounds interesting! > > (Internship discussion offline...) > >> Michael, have you news about Boots progress ? > > Perhaps the most important thing is that we've had more experience > building encapsulated platforms, as you have no doubt seen in the > commitmail for mirrorball adding (and fixing...) features. > > One of the key things that has not been stressed so far is that I no > longer think that getting anaconda installation support working is of > first importance. Instead, installing Fedora proper with the Fedora > installer, and then bringing it under management with a script that > builds a conary database that represents the existing RPM database, > is a better path, because we don't have to constantly play catchup > on building the installer. If from time to time we have a working > installer as a "native" feature, that's fine -- but we don't *need* > to have one for the project to be successful. > > Integrating bodhi support into mirrorball is how we intended to > make the repository represent all the RPMs, allowing the adoption > process to take place. (It would now be possible to do without that, > because we'll be importing some platforms that do not have errata > with the necessary data, but I think that it would help us build > more useful groups.) Note that to do this, we do have to build > all the packages, including the trademark-containing packages. > We have to do this carefully to follow the trademark guidelines. > > This best way to accomplish this is to divide it up into two pieces: > > * Pure Fedora import: All the packages from Fedora, imported into > a Conary repository, with groups that represent the temporal > release structure of Fedora. This *is* a Fedora mirror in Conary > repository format. It is wrapped in Conary metadata just as a Yum > repository wraps the RPMs in Yum metadata, and just putting the > RPM files in the filesystem wraps those files in filesystem metadata. > > * Boots: a derived platform from the pure Fedora import (what Fedora > calls a "remix"), containing at least Conary, possibly containing > a port of anaconda that can install appliance ISOs as built by > rBuilder, PackageKit Conary back end, and so forth. This can > have packages from the Fedora import with modifications, and > the boots groups should not reference the trademark-containing > packages as discussed in the trademark guidelines. > >> Could we have a first >> version of Boots released during the Fedora 13 release day ? > > Regarding any release on release day, the main problem is that the > import process takes days to run, just to inspect the built packages > to build the Conary metadata around them, so we couldn't both start > and finish the import on release day. While it would be possible to > start with betas on a devel label, then finish up on release day and > build groups and push, I know we don't have sufficient underutilized > hardware available right now at rPath to run that process in time > for F13, entirely without respect to how much time interested > individuals within rPath would have available to work on the import. > _______________________________________________ > Foresight-devel mailing list > Foresight-devel@lists.rpath.org > http://lists.rpath.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel _______________________________________________ Foresight-devel mailing list Foresight-devel@lists.rpath.org http://lists.rpath.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel
