Re: concerns about Salsa
Bastian Blank writes ("Re: concerns about Salsa"):
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 12:54:32PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Salsa is hardly the first Debian production service to not be running
> > the packaged version of its primary application, and it won't be the
> > last. ftp.debian.org isn't running the packaged version of dak.
> Running packaged versions also means that only the system admins can
> actually update the code. However they don't want to run the services.
> Until we have user-installable packages, this won't change.
These are amongst the reasons I chose the same strategy for my dgit
git server service.
> > However, I hope it's not running vendor-provided binaries. That would
> > be quite poor IMO and a big departure from our normal practice. Are
> > you sure that that is the case ?
> GitLab and all the associated stuff is pulled from git repositories and
> built on the system.
> You can find out how everything is done in our repository with Ansible
> stuff at https://salsa.debian.org/salsa/salsa-ansible. If you know a
> better way to do something, just send patches the usual way.
Thanks. That seems like a good approach in general.
> However, we actually pull in some external binaries, for node, yarn
> and go.
That's unfortunate. I'm not sure I have the skills or tuits to help
fix it, though :-/.
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.