cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wido den Hollander <>
Subject Re: [ASFCS40][DISCUSS] Binary packaging - another round of discussions that I'd like us to come to a conclusion on.
Date Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:49:07 GMT

On 09/12/2012 09:55 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> All,
> This is another issue that we need to come to a consensus on (and I
> think we can do lazy consensus if required here) prior to 4.0 being
> released.
> We've variously been discussing how to best provide binary artifacts
> from the 4.0 release.  Knowing that we are purely discussing
> convenience builds for users, and that ASF releases are source only,
> I'd like to propose the following approach.
> I propose that the project only publishes source tarballs to the ASF
> mirrors, and that we rely on the community at large to publish binary
> build artifacts.
> Wido has volunteered to host deb and rpm repos containing packages
> built from the source, and I know that (over time) we will see the
> actual distributions put cloudstack packages together.  I would
> imagine (and am not speaking for Wido), that we could work with Wido
> to ensure that his hosted repos have the latest release in them.  We
> would then be in a position where it's OK if a specific distro
> packaging community is a version or two behind the ASF releases.  That
> scenario would allow us to point users that want the very latest
> release to the custom repo, but folks that want official distro
> packages can simply use the version being provided by their OS's
> packaging system.

Getting the packages into the upstream repositories from Ubuntu, Debian 
and CentOS will take a lot of time, also, their release cycles are 
rather slow, so I think for CloudStack people will prefer packages build 
when a new release comes out.

However, it would never hurt if the packages hit the mainstream repos.

> For the convenience of the community, I'd further propose that we
> provide a set of links to these community repos on our download page
> (including appropriate verbiage about the URLs not representing
> official ASF release artifacts).  This would also include instructions
> for how to setup a RHEL/CentOS/Ubuntu system to pull from Wido's
> hosted repos.

My intention is indeed to modify the documentation and guide people 
through installing CS with the repositories, that's much easier for 
users and makes unattended installations with Puppet or Chef much easier.

For now I'll be uploading and building the packages manually, but later 
on we could have a link with Jenkins so we can have daily or weekly builds.


> As for QA teams involved in the testing of ASF releases, I believe
> that we should continue to use jenkins.c.o (with Citrix's agreement
> and continued support) as the source for downloading packages for
> testing.  This is because it can do it for us on a nightly schedule.
> There is one optional part of this proposal:  we include a tarball of
> cloudstack jar files on the ASF mirrors.  Although, I'm just not sure
> what value that provides to the community.
> Thoughts?
> -chip

View raw message