Hi guys,
So we've had requests for the nightlies to be fixed, and I thought I'd
let you know what's happening around that.
Firstly, the nightlies are back online as of yesterday - but in a
different place, and here's why…
When we released 1.0 we had a lot of trouble over the differences
between Debian and Ubuntu - packages that worked fine in one did not
work in the other. THat got me thinking about how we really needed to
restructure our deb repo to have one component per OS that we support.
We also needed to be building these packages on those OSes. It's
this work that has kept the nightlies offline for so long.
As of yesterday, I finished adding the package building to our Jenkins
system, and it will build packages for Debian Squeeze (32bit and
64bit) annd Ubuntu Precise (32bit and 64bit). However, because the the
repo format is different, I wanted to give people a chance to try it
before I overwrite the old repo.
So, for now, you access the new format repo like this:
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel squeeze stable
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel squeeze nightly
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel precise stable
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel precise nightly
Once that's had a few days to settle in and it looks ok, I will move
this to deb.theforeman.org as normal. Obviously at this point our wiki
and installer modules will be updated, but you may need to update your
systems. I expect that will happen around Wednesday next week.
Cheers,
Greg
Great work Greg!! Although we don't use the Debian packages to install
foreman, I would guess that you probably want to build packages for
the two most recent Ubuntu LTS releases:
10.04 and 12.04 (They have a 5 year support lifecycle, so we'd only
have to support two at a time.)
I'm guessing that most people who are deploying Ubuntu server aren't
using non-LTS releases? I think we could safely hold off on those
until we see demand for them. (Assuming you added the non-LTS
releases, which have an 18 month support window, it would add two more
releases we'd need to support, if we wanted to match the distro
support windows.)
This is a useful chart that covers Ubuntu support:
Thoughts? (I know I am asking you to do more work, but if it's not a
lot more work to add an extra release to support, I'd say it's
probably worth doing.)
Thanks,
Brian
···
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> So we've had requests for the nightlies to be fixed, and I thought I'd
> let you know what's happening around that.
>
> Firstly, the nightlies *are* back online as of yesterday - but in a
> different place, and here's why...
>
> When we released 1.0 we had a lot of trouble over the differences
> between Debian and Ubuntu - packages that worked fine in one did not
> work in the other. THat got me thinking about how we really needed to
> restructure our deb repo to have one component per OS that we support.
> We also needed to be building these packages *on* those OSes. It's
> this work that has kept the nightlies offline for so long.
>
> As of yesterday, I finished adding the package building to our Jenkins
> system, and it will build packages for Debian Squeeze (32bit and
> 64bit) annd Ubuntu Precise (32bit and 64bit). However, because the the
> repo format is different, I wanted to give people a chance to try it
> before I overwrite the old repo.
>
> So, for now, you access the new format repo like this:
>
> deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel squeeze stable
> deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel squeeze nightly
> deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel precise stable
> deb http://deb.theforeman.org/devel precise nightly
>
> Once that's had a few days to settle in and it looks ok, I will move
> this to deb.theforeman.org as normal. Obviously at this point our wiki
> and installer modules will be updated, but you may need to update your
> systems. I expect that will happen around Wednesday next week.
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users?hl=en.
>
Ok, so I've not heard any complaints over this structure - I plan to
update the repo, the wiki, and the installer to use the new form on
Monday.
Greg
···
On 11 October 2012 11:54, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
> Once that's had a few days to settle in and it looks ok, I will move
> this to deb.theforeman.org as normal. Obviously at this point our wiki
> and installer modules will be updated, but you may need to update your
> systems. I expect that will happen around Wednesday next week.
Ok, so it was a little longer than expected… 
The new repo style is now live. I have updated the foreman-installer
modules to match, so new installs of foreman should be unaffected, but
existing users will need to update their repo URLs. As discussed
earlier, these are now:
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/ squeeze stable
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/ squeeze nightly
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/ precise stable
deb http://deb.theforeman.org/ precise nightly
Use the appropriate one for your infrastructure.
As of right now, pretty much the entire build process is public. There
will be an upcoming blog post on how it all works, where are the code
is stored, and how anyone who wants to can get involved.
Cheers,
Greg
···
On 11 October 2012 11:54, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
> Once that's had a few days to settle in and it looks ok, I will move
> this to deb.theforeman.org as normal. Obviously at this point our wiki
> and installer modules will be updated, but you may need to update your
> systems. I expect that will happen around Wednesday next week.
12.04 is one of the build platforms. 10.04 is significantly harder due
to Gem issues. I might be able to do it, but not yet.
One thing I forgot to mention is that I'm going to drop the 'testing'
repo. It causes confusion in a number of ways, especially as it tends
to be left with old RCs after a release. Since nightly will be slaved
to commits to the develop branch, it will serve as a source of testing
candidates.
Greg
···
On 12 October 2012 18:26, Brian Gupta wrote:
> Great work Greg!! Although we don't use the Debian packages to install
> foreman, I would guess that you probably want to build packages for
> the two most recent Ubuntu LTS releases:
> 10.04 and 12.04 (They have a 5 year support lifecycle, so we'd only
> have to support two at a time.)
>> Great work Greg!! Although we don't use the Debian packages to install
>> foreman, I would guess that you probably want to build packages for
>> the two most recent Ubuntu LTS releases:
>> 10.04 and 12.04 (They have a 5 year support lifecycle, so we'd only
>> have to support two at a time.)
>
> 12.04 is one of the build platforms. 10.04 is significantly harder due
> to Gem issues. I might be able to do it, but not yet.
Ahh… so it is a non-trivial amount of work. That being the case, I
think waiting for someone to ask for 10.04 packages is probably for
the best. (If you need a 10.04 VM for builds I can give you one to use.)
> One thing I forgot to mention is that I'm going to drop the 'testing'
> repo. It causes confusion in a number of ways, especially as it tends
> to be left with old RCs after a release. Since nightly will be slaved
> to commits to the develop branch, it will serve as a source of testing
> candidates.
Makes sense.
···
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
> On 12 October 2012 18:26, Brian Gupta wrote:
Greg
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Foreman users” group.
To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to foreman-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users?hl=en.
Thanks, but anything I can debootstrap I can probably build for with
the new pbuilder-based build environment. Will let you know if I need
it though
···
On 12 October 2012 20:21, Brian Gupta wrote:
> Ahh.. so it is a non-trivial amount of work. That being the case, I
> think waiting for someone to ask for 10.04 packages is probably for
> the best. (If you need a 10.04 VM for builds I can give you one to use.)
