Re: Donation of a Calxeda Highbank node
- To: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com>, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>, hardware-donations@debian.org, Debian ARM <debian-arm@lists.debian.org>, Debian kernel maintainers <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>, armhf@buildd.debian.org, DSA list <debian-admin@lists.debian.org>, muts@offensive-security.com
- Subject: Re: Donation of a Calxeda Highbank node
- From: Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>
- Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 09:32:59 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20130427073259.GX23110@anguilla.noreply.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>, Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com>, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>, hardware-donations@debian.org, Debian ARM <debian-arm@lists.debian.org>, Debian kernel maintainers <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>, armhf@buildd.debian.org, DSA list <debian-admin@lists.debian.org>, muts@offensive-security.com
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20130426200008.GA16188@virgil.dodds.net>
- References: <[🔎] 20130412151619.GA21074@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com> <[🔎] CAODfWeG=O4VLr5HSOMS78J+aF-7sr0gOx8bqWe=QuTqes-yrVA@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20130426200008.GA16188@virgil.dodds.net>
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 02:49:05PM +0200, Hector Oron wrote:
> > Thanks, that is a very kind offer and with ARM hat on, we cannot
> > reject the offer, it makes it very interesting as a playground
> > machine. However, let me make some points here:
>
> > * ARM porters hat: It is very interesting machine, and very useful to
> > start experimenting with it as Debian is seeking for a full Calxeda
> > chassis.
> > * DSA hat: The machine shall not be a debian.org machine, so DSA could
> > export accounts if requested.
>
> Why in the world not? I'm sure there's no requirement for debian.org
> machines to be hardware owned by Debian. The s390 porter machines/buildds
> certainly aren't; I don't see why this machine would necessarily *not* be a
> d.o machine managed by DSA.
>
> Of course if it's going to be DSA-administered, I'm sure DSA would want
> exclusive admin rights on the machine; but that's just common sense, and
> AIUI not excluded by the offer.
The impression I got during the brief from the arm porters is that it is
so far unclear how well Debian will run on this nice shiney thing.
So for now it's just a test box/early porting box, and the policies and
procedures that come with DSAing a machine would be more a hindrance
than an asset during that stage.
Also, if it were a d.o system, it would be /either/ a porterbox /or/ a
buildd, not both. Whereas, as long as it's a test/play system run by
the porters presumably, they can stress test is at needed, maybe run a
(non-official?) buildd, while also providing porter chroots.
Once we have Debian running properly on this kind of HW, I wouldn't mind
taking over the machine. Though, to be really useful, we probably will
try to get more than one instance, one for a porterbox, and two -
ideally in different locations - for autobuilding packages.
Cheers,
weasel
--
| .''`. ** Debian **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: