Re: Salsa CI news
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 12:34 AM Steffen Möller wrote:
> I think your dispute goes down to the question if Debian's community
> infrastructure should preferably using software packaged for Debian
> (which salsa is doing) with the binaries Debian offers (which salsa is
> not doing).
I personally would love to see this happen, but I have to acknowledge
that it is unlikely we will because .deb from the archive isn't the
most popular deployment method for debian.org services. For example:
DSA use puppet for deployment of configuration and scripts. Service
maintainers deploy their own code directly from git. Service
maintainers use local copies of software instead of packages. Service
maintainers fork software they use. Service maintainers vendor
dependencies in their git repositories. On debian.net there is
probably some use of containers built in various ways.
> B) Using our own packages ensures that there is no diversion between
> what Debian ships and what Debian uses, so it can be bootstrapped on an
> island (which is the link to the DFSG) as a whole, not only the software
> it distributes.
There is one attribute of how Debian does things that clashes with
being able to do this; service maintainers need to be able to update
code on a different schedule to Debian stable and even backports
time-frames. Once we have bikesheds this will probably become less of
an issue.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: