CVS Admin Sucks Less

[Warren Togami]

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> 3) build for devel
> 
> Now if you wanted to package something for non-devel (the most common case,
> admittedly), then the following applied, too.
> 
>> 3) CVSSyncNeeded and wait...
>> 4) Fix-up and build
> 
> The point is, with this, I could build the package immediately.

The most common case is you want to build for both devel and current 
distros.  You might as well build all at once.  It is less overhead than 
building devel, waiting for CVS admin, then building the others.

> 
>> Current: CVS Admin
>> ==================
>> You ask cvs admin to create directories for you, then you do everything 
>> all at once.  This is actually FEWER steps than before.
>> 1) fedora-review+
>> 2) fedora-cvs? and wait...
>> 3) Check-in and build.
>>
>> Yes, this process still sucks, but it sucks less.  Let's just use this 
>> for now, and focus on making the ideal system for the future.
> 
> I want to ask again: why is it necessary to do this NOW? Why can't
> the changes wait until packagedb is ready?

If you wait for every part of a massive change to be implemented before 
making any change, then it will take FAR TOO LONG.

Instead we are making smaller incremental improvements with a few 
interim solutions, making it possible to get important parts done in the 
near-term.

(Important parts == Merging core and extras, enabling co-maintainership 
and easy delegation.  BIG WIN for everyone.)

> 
>> Future: Better Automation
>> =========================
>> I think the future infrastructure improvements like next-gen VCS and 
>> Package Database will eventually allow us to better automate this, 
>> perhaps making it entirely self-serve.  No waiting involved.
>>
>> 1) Pre-review, import into a theoretical hosted personal VCS to make it 
>> easy for others to review.  Changes prior to approval are tracked in 
>> history.
>> 2) fedora-review+ in database.
>> 3) System automatically validates fedora-review+.  Owner can check boxes 
>> of which branches they wish to create.  Then build.
>>
>> (There are a number of security considerations we must take into account 
>> for this to be possible.  The design and implementation for example 
>> would need to abstract access from PackageDB to VCS, limiting it to only 
>> certain operations like "create new package".)
> 
> Sounds promising. I hope we get to see this in action soon.
> 

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/
We need more people participating in this part.  If you are interested, 
please read the Fedora Infrastructure Wiki, join 
fedora-infrastructure-list and the #fedora-infrastructure meetings every 
Thursday.

Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com