Re: RFC: Storing Automated Tasks/Tests In Dist-Git (git-submodules)

[Pavel Raiskup]

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:01:30 AM CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > I'm not against it, as I'm not going to hack that :) but this is a lot of
> > expensive complexity, when submodules are here clearly for this purpose.
> 
> And are you going to hack on submodules? (both as user and to help infra 
> getting
> it set-up?)

Sorry pingou, wrongly written.  I'm not going to hack on _this proposal_,
so I'm not against it.  No doubts, we need that.

I'm going to participate at least as a package maintainer and test maintainer!

Pavel
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: RFC: Storing Automated Tasks/Tests In Dist-Git (git-submodules)

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:37:45AM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:40:44 AM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> > I didn't notice that my reply went only to Pavel, resending to devel@
> > 
> > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:25:46 +0200
> > Pavel Raiskup  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Monday, October 3, 2016 1:50:33 PM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> > > > https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/w/taskotron/new_distgit_task_storage_proposal/
> > > > ...
> > > > Please read through the wiki page I mentioned above and give us
> > > > feedback on whether what we're planning to implement is going to be
> > > > useful  
> > > 
> > > Useful, yes!
> > > 
> > > > or if there are areas of the plan which could be improved.  
> > > 
> > > Can we rather make the ./taskotron directory separate git submodule?
> > > I expect that I'm going to play with that directory a lot, without
> > > being "that much careful" as I'm with package directories; which
> > > might mean that for packaging work there might be a bit unpleasant
> > > rush in git-log otherwise.
> > 
> > I'd rather avoid git submodules and subtrees because that's a lot of
> > extra complexity to make sure that the various pointers are updated at
> > the correct times.
> 
> I disagree with extra complexity.  Sub-tree sounds like something which is
> terribly important -- so we can have separate ACLs for package and tests,
> I don't have to bother package maintainers when I develop tests ... etc.
> 
> And when we talk about sub-tree, git submodules bring *a lot* of control
> over sub-trees *for free*.  There's something like `git submodule update
> --init --recursive` (could be done by 'fedpkg clone'?).
> 
> Simply you can develop subtree without touching "parent", and once you are
> ready -- you just update hash.  Also one sub-trees (test directories) can
> be shared among packages (and not being able to share some testcases among
> several packages would be 99% show-stopper for me).
> 
> > I think that a better alternative to putting checks into the same
> > dist-git repo as packaging information would be to have differently
> > namespaced git repos (eg checks-rpms/libfoo for rpms/libfoo) and
> > enhance fedpkg to work with that second repository to make it look like
> > a subdirectory even though it's a separate git repo.
> 
> I'm not against it, as I'm not going to hack that :) but this is a lot of
> expensive complexity, when submodules are here clearly for this purpose.

And are you going to hack on submodules? (both as user and to help infra getting
it set-up?)


Pierre
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: RFC: Storing Automated Tasks/Tests In Dist-Git (git-submodules)

[Pavel Raiskup]

On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:40:44 AM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> I didn't notice that my reply went only to Pavel, resending to devel@
> 
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:25:46 +0200
> Pavel Raiskup  wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, October 3, 2016 1:50:33 PM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> > > https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/w/taskotron/new_distgit_task_storage_proposal/
> > > ...
> > > Please read through the wiki page I mentioned above and give us
> > > feedback on whether what we're planning to implement is going to be
> > > useful  
> > 
> > Useful, yes!
> > 
> > > or if there are areas of the plan which could be improved.  
> > 
> > Can we rather make the ./taskotron directory separate git submodule?
> > I expect that I'm going to play with that directory a lot, without
> > being "that much careful" as I'm with package directories; which
> > might mean that for packaging work there might be a bit unpleasant
> > rush in git-log otherwise.
> 
> I'd rather avoid git submodules and subtrees because that's a lot of
> extra complexity to make sure that the various pointers are updated at
> the correct times.

I disagree with extra complexity.  Sub-tree sounds like something which is
terribly important -- so we can have separate ACLs for package and tests,
I don't have to bother package maintainers when I develop tests ... etc.

And when we talk about sub-tree, git submodules bring *a lot* of control
over sub-trees *for free*.  There's something like `git submodule update
--init --recursive` (could be done by 'fedpkg clone'?).

Simply you can develop subtree without touching "parent", and once you are
ready -- you just update hash.  Also one sub-trees (test directories) can
be shared among packages (and not being able to share some testcases among
several packages would be 99% show-stopper for me).

> I think that a better alternative to putting checks into the same
> dist-git repo as packaging information would be to have differently
> namespaced git repos (eg checks-rpms/libfoo for rpms/libfoo) and
> enhance fedpkg to work with that second repository to make it look like
> a subdirectory even though it's a separate git repo.

I'm not against it, as I'm not going to hack that :) but this is a lot of
expensive complexity, when submodules are here clearly for this purpose.

If you wanted to make git-bisect working, this is going to be terrible (by
bisecting I mean that I want to see "tests" in the version compatible with
actual git-hash).  So if you choose whatever you want, and we talk about
subtrees -- keep bisecting working, please.

Pavel

> 
>
> Tim

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: RFC: Storing Automated Tasks/Tests In Dist-Git (git-submodules)

[Tim Flink]

I didn't notice that my reply went only to Pavel, resending to devel@

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:25:46 +0200
Pavel Raiskup  wrote:

> On Monday, October 3, 2016 1:50:33 PM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> > https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/w/taskotron/new_distgit_task_storage_proposal/
> > ...
> > Please read through the wiki page I mentioned above and give us
> > feedback on whether what we're planning to implement is going to be
> > useful  
> 
> Useful, yes!
> 
> > or if there are areas of the plan which could be improved.  
> 
> Can we rather make the ./taskotron directory separate git submodule?
> I expect that I'm going to play with that directory a lot, without
> being "that much careful" as I'm with package directories; which
> might mean that for packaging work there might be a bit unpleasant
> rush in git-log otherwise.

I'd rather avoid git submodules and subtrees because that's a lot of
extra complexity to make sure that the various pointers are updated at
the correct times.

I think that a better alternative to putting checks into the same
dist-git repo as packaging information would be to have differently
namespaced git repos (eg checks-rpms/libfoo for rpms/libfoo) and
enhance fedpkg to work with that second repository to make it look like
a subdirectory even though it's a separate git repo.

Tim


pgphNoculGaEJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: RFC: Storing Automated Tasks/Tests In Dist-Git (git-submodules)

[Pavel Raiskup]

On Monday, October 3, 2016 1:50:33 PM CEST Tim Flink wrote:
> https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/w/taskotron/new_distgit_task_storage_proposal/
> ...
> Please read through the wiki page I mentioned above and give us
> feedback on whether what we're planning to implement is going to be
> useful

Useful, yes!

> or if there are areas of the plan which could be improved.

Can we rather make the ./taskotron directory separate git submodule?  I expect
that I'm going to play with that directory a lot, without being "that much
careful" as I'm with package directories; which might mean that for packaging
work there might be a bit unpleasant rush in git-log otherwise.

Pavel
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org