1:19 a.m.
Hi,
is there any reason that we have buildbot 7.12 ((January 21, 2010))
and that upstream is now 8.3 ?
any problem to upgrade it ?
2:16 a.m.
On Thu, 26 May 2011 08:19:21 +0200, PM wrote:
Hi,
is there any reason that we have buildbot 7.12 ((January 21, 2010))
and that upstream is now 8.3 ?
any problem to upgrade it ?
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/buildbot
lists three open tickets, which have not been responded to yet either.
You might want to find out whether you would want to become a package
maintainer.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers
2:33 a.m.
2011/5/26 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com>:
On Thu, 26 May 2011 08:19:21 +0200, PM wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there any reason that we have buildbot 7.12 ((January 21, 2010))
> and that upstream is now 8.3 ?
> any problem to upgrade it ?
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/buildbot
lists three open tickets, which have not been responded to yet either.
You might want to find out whether you would want to become a package
maintainer.
I'm already a package maintainer for other packages, but before
jumping on this one, I just want to have some news from actual
maintainers
3:07 a.m.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:19 AM, philippe makowski
<makowski.fedora(a)gmail.com> wrote:
is there any reason that we have buildbot 7.12 ((January 21, 2010))
and that upstream is now 8.3 ?
any problem to upgrade it ?
In 0.8.0 upstream split the slave functions into a separate
buildbot-slave package
In short, we need a new package (and review), but I've got no time for
starting the procedure.
Besides, it's an interesting upgrade path: what should we do on
upgrades? leave out the -slave package, make it a dependency of the
master so existing installations are not affected or something else?
As usual, help is very much appreciated
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.com
http://identi.ca/giallu - http://twitter.com/giallu
3:38 a.m.
On Thu, 26 May 2011 10:07:53 +0200, GS wrote:
In 0.8.0 upstream split the slave functions into a separate
buildbot-slave package
In short, we need a new package (and review), but I've got no time for
starting the procedure.
Besides, it's an interesting upgrade path: what should we do on
upgrades? leave out the -slave package, make it a dependency of the
master so existing installations are not affected or something else?
As usual, help is very much appreciated
A typical upgrade path scenario would be to create the following packages:
buildbot-master
buildbot-slave
buildbot : meta-package which requires -master and -slave
5:10 a.m.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
buildbot-master
buildbot-slave
buildbot : meta-package which requires -master and -slave
Good. I guess I can produce both buildbot and buildbot-master from the
current "buildbot" package, so just one review for buildbot-slave is
actually needed?
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.com
http://identi.ca/giallu - http://twitter.com/giallu
12:39 p.m.
2011/5/26 Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com>:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Schwendt
<mschwendt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> buildbot-master
> buildbot-slave
> buildbot : meta-package which requires -master and -slave
Good. I guess I can produce both buildbot and buildbot-master from the
current "buildbot" package, so just one review for buildbot-slave is
actually needed?
or even produce build-slave too from the current "buildbot" package
that's the way it was done in OpenSuse and the way I did in Mageia
http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/buildbot/current/SPECS/buildbo...
4696
days inactive
4712
days old
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Gianluca Sforna -
Kevin Kofler -
Michael Schwendt -
Philippe Makowski