[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       tendrl-devel
Subject:    Re: [Tendrl-devel] Frontend tool stack: choices made
From:       Nigel Babu <nigelb () redhat ! com>
Date:       2016-09-23 13:41:32
Message-ID: 20160923132932.GA15486 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 08:03:11AM -0400, Alfredo Deza wrote:
> I don't think John meant packaging using the community/language
> support, but rather using system packages.
>
> The Ceph project builds binaries for a few distributions, and packages
> some Python tools that come included.
>
> This has nothing to do with pip, virtualenv, or how (easy?) it may be
> with Node.js, the point here is that it might be
> very tricky to do this with JS dependencies compared to say Python,
> because Python packages are more readily available.
>
> >
> > Suggestion taken for doing full packaging from day 1. We already
> > have the intention to automate the entire process anyway. So, from
> > building, testing, packaging, deploying should ideally be taken care
> > of after each successful merge/push into the upstream/master.
>
> I would love to see what the plan for that is here. For Ceph we build
> for several different distros and distro versions, and sometimes
> for different architectures. The current system produces RPMs, DEBs
> and their corresponding repositories.
>
> This is a very non-trivial system that does build from upstream
> changes in most branches too
>
> "packaging from day 1" means here that, there should be a plan for the
> community to be able to consume these binaries and repositories
> for various different distros (is there a list of supported distros
> somewhere? or what the plan is for those?)

Nishanth has been working with me to find the best way forward for tests and
builds. I've recommended that we follow best practices, like defining jobs with
Jenkins Job Builder. I do not want to see Tendrl playing catch with CI infra
like we are in Gluster-land.

I believe the current plan is to start with Centos CI for automated tests and
builds. We can easily automate CentOS-based packages and builds from there.

As Alfredo said, this is something we need to think of in the context of this
discussion. Installing dependencies using npm in not how we ease installation
for clients and users. Most people (sysadmins?) would prefer installing
a package and have it work.

Assuming we're going to support CentOS6 and CentOS7. How easy is to get
everything installed for node.js dependencies using rpm? Does node work on
CentOS5? Because, remember, it still gets security fixes. If we decide we're
only going to support CentOS7 and above, remember CentOS7 is supported until
2024. Can we make sure everything works until then?


--
nigelb

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]