On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Colin Watson <cjwat...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > For the plan to deliver the phone RTM from a derived "ubuntu-rtm" > distribution, we'll need to use a different set of silo PPAs, since PPAs > are attached to a particular distribution (which is clearer now that the > PPA URL format has been changed to include the distribution name). > Although there are a few remaining bits, Launchpad has mostly now been > extended to cope with non-Ubuntu PPAs, and it's time to think about how > we're going to handle this in CI Train. > > We probably just want to create another 20 silos for ubuntu-rtm once it > exists. The open questions are how to refer to them, and how to arrange > to land things in them. In the remainder of this mail I will refer to > PPAs consistently using their new ~OWNER/DISTRIBUTION/NAME scheme in an > attempt to minimise confusion. > > Note that Didier indicated in > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2014-June/002898.html > that he thought the changes to cupstream2distro itself would be pretty > straightforward. I agree, for what it's worth. > > * Names? The current scheme is > ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu/landing-{000..020}, with 000 being a > test silo. We could use > ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu-rtm/landing-{021..040} to avoid having > to invent a new naming scheme. However, this is sort of non-obvious > to the uninitiated, it doesn't give us a nice space for a test silo, > and it cuts off further expansion of the ubuntu silos in case we need > that. Could we use > ~ci-train-ppa-service/ubuntu-rtm/landing-{000..020}? Launchpad will > permit this (PPAs are unique up to owner/distribution/name), so the > only question is whether this is clear enough.
think the lattter sounds reasonable. > > * How do we refer to these informally? Right now people say "silo 1" > etc. Perhaps "silo RTM-1"? I think it ought to be made clear when > you're landing something in the more tightly-controlled RTM archive. I can imagine that folks start talking like "its in stable silo 001" ... "in devel silo 001" > > * How will we handle this in the spreadsheet? My only thought so far > is that we should have a column for whether you're targeting RTM or > not. But I guess at the moment we have a destination series in the > "Assign to silo" menu entry, which is used for trusty builds - I > guess maybe that could be extended to include a distribution? Seems > a bit easy to make a mistake that way though. > I anticipated the least work on infrastructure side would be do duplicate the spreadsheet and point that as the ubuntu-rtm target. Not perfect, but as its not really a long lasting thing we are inventing here, I would be in favor of going the route of less investment in the spreadsheet code itself. That "stable landing spreadsheet" would grow a column noting "landed in devel?" > * Presumably the backend and the dashboard would both need to be > extended. I'm not familiar with the details here and would welcome > commentary from those who are. Easiest might be to also duplicate the backend jenkins. It's already charged afaik, so duplicating that for ubuntu-rtm might be easy. CI Team can help on getting dashboard fixed so we also have a stable channel view there. > > * Anything else? > > Thanks, > > -- > Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
