[CentOS-devel] Shipping Build Tools in one of the CentOS Repos

On Dec 01 09:52, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Brian Stinson <bstinson at ksu.edu> wrote:
> 
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I would like to start a discussion on where/how to ship the package
> > building toolchain. Most of these tools shipped in EPEL, but deploying
> > them to one of our repos would allow us to maintain our own patches if
> > necessary and would eliminate any dependencies on 3rd party repositories
> > for our core tools.
> >
> 
> I'd much rather not do this for a couple reasons:
> 1. CentOS Extras shouldn't overlap with EPEL.
> 2. If there are reasons to customize/patch some of these things for the
> CentOS infrastructure, perhaps they belong in a new/separate repo --
> especially considering centos-extras is enabled by default.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > 1.) Some of the tools (koji especially) will require config
> >     customization, what is the best way to handle that?
> >
> 
> Isn't there some configuration management system in place? Or maybe I'm
> misunderstanding the question...?

I definitely should have elaborated here. When using the koji client, we
will be using Koji Profiles to distinguish between separate build
systems (Fedora, CentOS CBS, on-prem koji etc.) These configs can be
deployed a number of different ways, we could: 

1.) ship upstream /etc/koji.conf (which points to nothing), and add the
    CBS config as the default

2.) ship /etc/koji.conf from EPEL but patch it so the CBS config is
    default

3.) ship /etc/koji.conf from EPEL and add a parallel installed CBS
    config that gets used by naming our koji cli tool /usr/bin/cbs

Personally, I'm partial to option 3 since it would be a little easier on
EPEL developers who are also CentOS SIG developers. Although I
could be convinced that having our configs as default (options 1 or 2)
is necessary here.

> 
> >
> > 2.) What should the testing -> release process look like after a
> > koji build is done?
> >
> 
> Are you planning to have a testing/staging Koji instance running for
> people to QA?

Since we are mostly talking about the clients, I was thinking about
preparing the toolchain in one of the testing repos in the CBS and
pointing developers there before the first release. It wouldn't be a bad
idea to have a -testing repo for future releases. 

--Brian