Just some points of information from my side;

- We (bunch of people at ShapeBlue) took this initiative to provide packages as 
a convenience to users, there were existing 3rd party repositories at that time 
but we found they were poorly maintained, for example - packages and 
systemvmtemplates were not readily available after any release or after 
discovery of any security issues (such as ghost, poodle issues etc)

- We also wanted to list all the things new users would need on *a single page* 
such as where to get packages, systemvmtemplate and documentation, see 
http://shapeblue.com/packages. This page has all the necessary information 
about the packages such as what they are (upstream, main etc) and how they were 
built and other information. None of the other 3rd party repos did that at the 
time, and we kept our promise to maintain this for users and I’ve been doing 
this since 4.3/4.4 timeframe, including any security advisory that was needed 
via our blogs (for example, ghost/poodle systemvmtemplate updates etc).

- We also wanted to share our custom patches which were simply packages built 
from official releases with additional/critical bug fixes, the value we 
produced for our customers here was the ability to get such packages and we 
thought it would be good to share them with users and community

- We also wanted to share custom packages that were backported features on 
official releases and that were aimed to be future upgrade-able to upstream 
packages (for example, saml+quota on 4.5 release at 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/custom, and users can upgrade to 
4.6/4.7 in future). A popular reason is that, users won’t really upgrade to 
major releases just because they are out, typically I’ve seen users upgrade 
once or twice a year, while some users really avoid upgrading at all and but 
would prefer upgrading to minor releases (a reason why we maintain old branches 
or do minor releases).

- Information was always available here on whom to contact, sponsors of the 
repos etc: http://packages.shapeblue.com/README.txt and recently here: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/README.txt. I’ve personally received 
several email regarding the repository and have been supporting users both 
privately if they would email me personally, or on users@ ML.

- We also allow people to mirror our repos via rsync: (try rsync 
rsync://packages.shapeblue.com), here a mirror hosted by Lucian: 
http://mirrors.coreix.net/packages.shapeblue.com (Lucian mirrors several 3rd 
party repos including cloudstack.apt-get one), http://mirror.bhaisaab.org (this 
for example is faster for Asian geographies)

- The ShapeBlue provided repo is too maintained by members of the community who 
happen to be affiliated with one company but that does not make it better or 
worse than others

- The repository link was added about a year ago by myself on the old site 
(apache cms based system, before we moved to github/middleman/asf-site based 
publishing) as a convenience to users. The 
shapeblue.com/packages<http://shapeblue.com/packages> page, by default shows 
information on consuming the upstream packages/repo (noredist builds from 
official releases with no changes) and we don’t favour or recommend consuming 
from main or custom or any other repos.

Regards.

On 26-Nov-2015, at 3:17 PM, sebgoa <run...@gmail.com<mailto:run...@gmail.com>> 
wrote:


On Nov 26, 2015, at 7:52 AM, John Burwell 
<john.burw...@shapeblue.com<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:

All,

A conversation emerged on a PR [1] regarding how package repositories should 
listed on the downloads page [2].  This PR was prompted by a change on the page 
which removed reference to the ShapeBlue repositories.

Let me touch base with Pierre-Luc to see what happened. It seems he removed it, 
but he is also the one who added it in the first place.

The PR proposes listing all "3rd-Party Distributions" in a separate section in 
the same manner as the Apache Cassandra [3] project — clearly stating that the 
package repositories are not endorsed by the community.  Objections were raised 
that the apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/><http://apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/>> 
repository is a “blessed” community repository, and therefore, not a third 
party repository.  To the best of my knowledge (and my ability to search the 
mailing list archives), I can not find a vote that changed the project 
deliverables to include distribution packages or a particular repository for 
them.

There was no vote on this, and we should not get down that path of arguing 
about whether apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/> is blessed or not.

Very early when CloudStack arrived at apache, Wido started hosting packages and 
has kept doing it, on his own time on his own budget. He has been kind enough 
to give access to the server to a few of us and can give access to people who 
request it.

Hence this evolved as the "community repo".

However since we only vote on source, we do not vote on packages and we should 
not say that this "community repo" is a blessed repo (there is a bit of grey 
area here).

We have always said that this is a community maintained repo in contrary to an 
official ASF repo.


Furthermore, the vote for 4.6.0 was only for the source deliverable — not 
distribution packages.  As such the packages contained in the 
apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/><http://apt-get.eu<http://apt-get.eu/>> 
repository are no more “blessed” or endorsed than any other packages 
distributed by other parties.


They are not blessed (as voted on), but have grown organically to be maintained 
by several folks with different affiliations.

In my opinion, favoring one 3rd-party repository over another is detrimental to 
the community.  We should either list all maintained 3rd-party package 
repositories or we should list none at all.   By maintained, I mean a 
repository that meets the following criteria:

*   All contained packages are built from project release tags
*   The packages contained in the repository are up-to-date with latest release 
tags

The only variations in the packages across “maintained” repositories should be 
the plugins from the CloudStack source tree included in the package.  In order 
to be listed on the downloads page, a repository must meet this definition and 
provide a brief description of the repository’s purpose.

Some on the PR discussion asked about the purpose and composition of the 
packages in the ShapeBlue repository.  The packages in the ShapeBlue repository 
are noredist builds of community release tags.

Remembering when Rohit started this, (as he happened to be at my house couple 
times during that timeframe), the idea that triggered this was to start build 
packages for every commit, not just releases. As well as starting to offer 
packages that contained hot fixes.

They contain no additional patches or changes.

This repository was created to provide users with an convenient/familiar way to 
install the noredist build of a release.

Finally, as I have stated elsewhere, I think the project should build 
distribution packages signed by the project and distributed from official 
package repositories.  However, we must come to a consensus as community this 
change in deliverables and work out a variety of issues (e.g. supported 
platforms, repository management, signing, etc) to ensure that users receive 
well-tested, community voted packages.  Finally, it seems like there will be a 
role for 3rd-party repositories now and in the future.  Listing all available 
3rd-party repos as I propose would be convenient for users, and ensure fairness 
to all contributors.

Thanks,
-John

[1]: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/20
[2]: http://cloudstack.apache.org/downloads.html
[3]: http://cassandra.apache.org/download/


All in all, as was mentioned by Pierre Luc on the PR, I do not see a problem 
with listing (on the www download page):

* Official source
* Community maintained repo (not voted but maintained by more than single 
vendor)
* Third party repo

In the rest of the documentation however, I don't think we should be using 
vendor specific URLs.

The only risk with this is the user "confusion" question:

- What is different between the repos ?
- Which one should I use ?
- I used a third party repo, I have a problem who can help me ?




---
John Burwell (@john_burwell)
VP of Software Engineering, ShapeBlue
(571) 403-2411 | +44 20 3603 0542
http://www.shapeblue.com | @ShapeBlue
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS



Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Software 
Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>

This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended 
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or 
opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon 
its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you 
believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company 
incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company 
incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape 
Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is 
operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company 
registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from 
Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Rohit Yadav
Software Architect

[cid:image003.png@01D122E8.F6EFE910]


S: +44 20 3603 0540<tel:+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892<tel:+447770745036>

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | 
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/> | 
Twitter:@ShapeBlue<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue>

ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS

Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Software 
Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>

This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended 
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or 
opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon 
its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you 
believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company 
incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company 
incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape 
Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is 
operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company 
registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from 
Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Reply via email to