jreznik at redhat.com
Tue Sep 3 08:04:44 UTC 2013
----- Original Message -----
> I would like to get your feedback about COPR 
>  http://miroslav.suchy.cz/blog/archives/2013/08/29/what_is_copr/index.html
> We are the beggining and there are two options of where we can go:
Do we consider third option - to replace Koji and Copr by OBS? The thing is - I really
don't like idea of having two different build systems, forcing people to use two different
set of tools (and yeah, I mean command here too;-), two different workflows... And yes,
we already do it - consider package reviews. When you start review, you are on your
own, then you have to go through the review process, then you have to learn dist-git/
Koji. Imagine - you start your review in Copr part of Koji, using one set of tools,
once you're happy, you click review button somewhere in UI, automated tests are run
based on fedora-review, reviewers get notified there's a new package, reviews/waives
issues and voila package is in the main set of packages, you still use the same tools,
same workflow. Even we can re-review packages in main repo periodically - mostly
that automated one. This is my dream but if I understand OBS, it's definitely possible
there (I had an account there even it was public but have not used it for several
years). So short summary - make packagers life easier, let's have one solution, one
set of tools and for really hostile packages (that do not fit main Fedora tree)
separate instance of build system to be used for RPM Fusion like style packages.
Btw. this does not mean I want to replace Koji with OBS, just an option, I'd like
to see Koji as that ultimate tool to solve our problems.
> I would like to ask *you* what is your opinion?
That's my opinion and my 1 haler ;-).
> Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS
> Red Hat, Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
More information about the devel