On 05/20/2016 06:57 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi everybody,
You probably noticed, that there is ongoing build of all Python packages
in Copr [1] and today, I was approached by Miroslav Suchý, that he'd
like to do the same for rubygems. And this in turn triggered these
questions:
1) Would you be interested to create ruby-sig group in FAS? We could
make the group owner of some packages and in turn, the members of the
group could maintain the packages, without explicitly asking for some ACLs.
2) For the Copr rebuild of rubygems, there needs to be some FAS group
again. Python guys are asking for "pypi-builds-sig" group [2], hence
following their lead, I'd like to ask for "rubygems-builds-sig" group
(note that although I don't like the '-sig' suffix in this case, it is
mandated by the infrastructure ticket template).
So what are your thoughts?
Vít
The FAS groups seem reasonable. Should reduce packaging overhead if all
goes as intended.
Is the idea behind the copr repo to eventually remove the build from the
main distro repositories? Or will they live side by side? (with
different intents / workflows)
-Mo