For the plan to deliver the phone RTM from a derived "ubuntu-rtm" distribution, we'll need to use a different set of silo PPAs, since PPAs are attached to a particular distribution (which is clearer now that the PPA URL format has been changed to include the distribution name). Although there are a few remaining bits, Launchpad has mostly now been extended to cope with non-Ubuntu PPAs, and it's time to think about how we're going to handle this in CI Train.
We probably just want to create another 20 silos for ubuntu-rtm once it exists. The open questions are how to refer to them, and how to arrange to land things in them. In the remainder of this mail I will refer to PPAs consistently using their new ~OWNER/DISTRIBUTION/NAME scheme in an attempt to minimise confusion. Note that Didier indicated in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2014-June/002898.html that he thought the changes to cupstream2distro itself would be pretty straightforward. I agree, for what it's worth. * Names? The current scheme is ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu/landing-{000..020}, with 000 being a test silo. We could use ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu-rtm/landing-{021..040} to avoid having to invent a new naming scheme. However, this is sort of non-obvious to the uninitiated, it doesn't give us a nice space for a test silo, and it cuts off further expansion of the ubuntu silos in case we need that. Could we use ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu-rtm/landing-{000..020}? Launchpad will permit this (PPAs are unique up to owner/distribution/name), so the only question is whether this is clear enough. * How do we refer to these informally? Right now people say "silo 1" etc. Perhaps "silo RTM-1"? I think it ought to be made clear when you're landing something in the more tightly-controlled RTM archive. * How will we handle this in the spreadsheet? My only thought so far is that we should have a column for whether you're targeting RTM or not. But I guess at the moment we have a destination series in the "Assign to silo" menu entry, which is used for trusty builds - I guess maybe that could be extended to include a distribution? Seems a bit easy to make a mistake that way though. * Presumably the backend and the dashboard would both need to be extended. I'm not familiar with the details here and would welcome commentary from those who are. * Anything else? Thanks, -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
