[CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
R P Herrold
herrold at owlriver.com
Tue Apr 12 18:33:22 UTC 2011
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 4/12/2011 12:51 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
>>
>> off the top of my head, here is the meta-code
> Would you really repeat those steps by hand if someone gave
> you a new server to add to what you use? Maybe things are
> worse than I'd guessed.
You did not read the commentary ... much may be automated
[I've blogged about using lftp to mirror a pile of SRPMs as in
step 1; published the perl build reading scripts, and the
chroot building process as long ago as cAos days, and so
forth], but much of full distribution building is problem
solving skills and 'one off tasks' that vary over time as the
SRPMs dictate when one goes to build them
Ther is no substitute for doing it to learn how to do it.
Speculation from bystanders is not all that helpful; the
process is understood, so 'helpful' attempts on streamlining
process are not helpful. If one wants to help, set up a local
laboratory and learn how to build --- but this is quite hard,
and so we've recommend bug triage, test writing and other
'reputational' building paths into the project ... but people
would rather troll and trawl in mailing lists. I've referred
to 'do-ers' and 'talkers' over the years. Eventually the
'do-ers' ignroe 'talkers'
Writing the flowchart got me to thinking about the desire
someone had for adding 'metering, such as a twitter driven
'progress bar' --- It will not happen, because one does not
know what measure of builds represent 'full scale' complete,
until one is complete, which is too late for a progress bar
[unless one is 'solving' the rebuild yet again, a useless
act]. Sadly the effort is not even linear so that one might
extrapolate a 'close rate' because the 'hard stuff' tends to
pile up and be solved last
-- Russ herrold
More information about the CentOS
mailing list