Re: tag2upload service architecture and risk assessment - draft v2
On August 28, 2019 1:42:56 PM UTC, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
>>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> writes:
>
> Scott> Today the authoritative repository for what's in Debian is
> Scott> the package archive. My read is you want to change it so
> Scott> that the package archive is an implementation detail hanging
> Scott> off of a set of git repositories and I am not at all
> Scott> comfortable with this concept.
>
> Scott> Your proposal completely changes the notion of what our
> Scott> package archive is while, IMO, pretending to be something
> Scott> else.
>
>Actually, I think that this is so basic to the proposal that it may be
>understated but is obvious and is not being hidden.
>
>During the DPL campaign, a number of people, including Joerg, made
>statements that I interpreted as explicitly wanting to make this
>change.
>That is, they wanted to move our authoritative source format to Git,
>possibly even getting rid of dscs in the medium future.
>
>I'm sure that Ian and Sean had been thinking about this before the DPL
>campaign.
>But I think in a very real sense, they took that discussion and tried
>to show us what it might look like.
>
>Now we all get to think about it and decide how their implementation
>experience influences whether we think it is a good idea.
>
>At least in my mind, this is all predicated on believing that moving
>away from today's dscs toward git as authoritative source is actually a
>good idea.
>If you don't believe that, then you're never going to like this
>proposal
>at all.
>
>
>I guess you could decide you want tag2upload somehow even though you
>don't want that transition.
>I personally don't see how you get there unless you buy into the idea
>of
>moving toward git as source.
>Also, I want to make it clear that the DPL campaign didn't establish a
>project direction. It established enough interest that the idea was
>worth exploring.
>I'm not saying that because people brought this up in the campaign,
>we've somehow decided to make a change.
>I'm also not saying that this is somehow a DPL issue because it
>happened
>in the DPL campaign.
>
>As I just mentioned on IRC, I'm spending more time replying to these
>messages than makes sense for the DPL to do. (My replies are personal
>to the extent that's a thing, but because I'm the DPL any reply I make
>here inherently takes time away from other things.) I think someday the
>DPL might need to get involved in helping make decisions in this space.
>I think that's months or longer away. So, I'm trying to disengage, but
>doing a terrible job of it. I guess in part because I see people
>talking past each other.
Okay. If that's the goal, then let's discuss what that would look like and if it's a good idea rather than focusing on implementation details of getting the camel's nose inside the tent [1].
Scott K
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel's_nose
Reply to: