
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:26:54PM +0100, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Magnus Therning
wrote: [...] Moreover I'm not fond of this kind of race.
Neither am I, but I see no way easy way of addressing that.
A way to quickly sending notices that a change is in progress.
Send it where? To the mailing list?
I'm a strong believer in only pushing changes once they build, and the only way of making sure of that is to make the build. Building ~50 packages takes quite a while.
Yes but you pushed the x86_64 while the i686 was not fully built.
I recommend the following:
* build one arch * git push * build the other * push both
Good suggestion, I will adopt this. [...]
Currently, there are not much users. And I want this repo to at least suit my needs otherwise I will simply build them for my use. I prefer to have the side effect of being potentially useful for someone else.
Fair enough, but I still ask of you to consider that every package you add will result in longer build times and that affects everyone who works on keeping [haskell] up-to-date.
So for me we move out broken packages that we cannot quickly fix if they are not much used.
How do we find out if they aren't used?
I don't know. Maybe we can GC with a kind of vote/lease system. Imagine the following use case:
$ cblrepo vote agda haskell-pandoc ...
Which would transitively mark these packages as used (or add a voice to them, or put a timestamp).
$ git commit ; git push
Everyone does the same and then:
$ cblrepo remove `cblrepo unused` $ cblrepo clearvotes
I'm not sure I understand the thinking behind this, but I suspect this would mean that only people with commit access to our habs repo may vote. Or did I get that wrong? /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then being a real problem in the longer term. -- Alan Kay