incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edison Su <Edison...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [ASFCS40] Specifically what should be our "binary distribution"?
Date Thu, 06 Sep 2012 23:40:55 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 1:56 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS40] Specifically what should be our "binary
> distribution"?
> 
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 09/06/2012 09:56 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012, at 02:19 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Looking at previous CloudStack releases on sourceforge, I see that
> the
> >>>> "binary" distributions are tar.gz rpm/deb packages for RHEL and
> >>>> Ubuntu.  I've looked at other Apache projects, and I see that they
> >>>> usually include the built jar files as their "binary" release
> >>>> artifacts.
> >>>>
> >>>> So my question for everyone is, what specifically do you think we
> >>>> should be distributing as an RC (and eventually as a release)?  Do
> we
> >>>> want to do a set of the jar files in a tar.gz archive?  Do we want
> to
> >>>> do RPM and DEV packages?  Do we want both?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> How useful are a set of .jar packages in a tarball?
> >>>
> >>> Ideally, we can provide something that lets people get set up in as
> few
> >>> steps as possible.
> >>
> >>
> >> Agreed - I was raising the question, but I don't think it's needed
> or
> >> useful.
> >>
> >>>> If we do the RPM and DEB packages, what OS should we be building
> on for
> >>>> each?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> At a minimum, the latest RHEL/CentOS and Ubuntu LTS.
> >>
> >>
> >> OK - So should we agree specifically on building on CentOS 6.3 and
> Ubuntu
> >> 12.04?
> >>
> >
> > This was already discussed about a month ago:
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cloudstack-
> dev/201208.mbox/%3C501A7954.8020604%40widodh.nl%3E
> >
> > We came to the conclusion:
> >
> > - Ubuntu 12.04
> > - CentOS/RHEL 6.2 and 6.3
> >
> > I still think our binary distribution should be in the form of RPM
> and DEB
> > files, that makes life for admins so much easier.
> 
> Right, OK on that.  For this first RC, I'm going to use CentOS 6.2 and
> 6.3.
> 
> I'm also able to easily do Ubuntu 12.04, but I haven't tested the
> ./waf deb process yet.  Do you know if the deb build is working right
> now?
> 
> > I'll be setting up a Debian/Ubuntu repository soon for at the Debian
> > packages.
> 
> So I think that's great, but I also would like us to release the final
> 4.0 RPMs and DEBs via the ASF mirrors.  Perhaps similar to the
> previous sourceforge packaging structure?
> 
> Does anyone know where the install.sh that was included with the
> Citrix cloudstack distro lives?  Is there a packaging process to
> create that tarball?

Here it is our internal build system: https://github.com/CloudStack/hudsonbuild
Which can build debs/rpms. I am trying to integrate it with http://jenkins.cloudstack.org/
> 
> 
> 
> >>> (Long term we need to focus on being included with the distros, but
> >>> that's a different discussion.)
> >>>
> >
> > These are the platforms we build binaries for, not the platforms it's
> only
> > going to work on.
> >
> >
> >>>> I know these questions might be obvious to some people, but I
> wanted
> >>>> to get a clear consensus from the list.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> --
> >>> Joe Brockmeier
> >>> jzb@zonker.net
> >>> Twitter: @jzb
> >>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
> >>>
> >

Mime
View raw message