[katello-devel] where to get required katello gems

[Petr Chalupa]

I am the osx user so I have to speak out ;)

I think this is not just my issue. Not everybody is running on fedora, 
this affects all debian-based distributions as well. I think it should 
be solved satisfactory not to discourage potential contributors.

I think they like theirs tweaked machines, they are used to theirs tools 
and They want to use them as I do. To do so you need run katello app 
locally against a VM with services (db, pulp, candlepin).

I may have a compromise:
- If all gems are in rpm repos, with the .gem files actualized.
- Then a developer can do 'bundle package' on the VM to get vendor/cache 
with all needed gems including theirs CVE patches.
- Then he can run 'bundle install --locally' on any development machine 
and he is good to go.

We can later decide to add a repo with vendor/cache to make it even easier.

To sumarize: I think the main issue for non fedora development machines 
are not updated .gem files in rubygem rpms.

Petr

On 16.07.12 16:23, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> The issue is not about how to work with bundler. If we package all the
> build deps as RPMs, we dont need bundler anymore. So installing
> development setup would be just like installing one metapackage via yum.
> That's it. And we are not far from that!
>
> Rubygems in Red Hat's world are evil. Just like JAR files. Our customer
> do deliver using RPMs. We should do the same. I can understand it is
> very comfortable to have ability to run rvm or bunlder, but this is
> fight that every developer must do its own. Especially those with MacOS
> ;-)
>
> My point is - instead of providing rubygem repos or fighting with
> bundler configurations, let's just package devel only dependencies as
> RPMs so devs can install them just like any other software they use. And
> then handle bunlder the usual way (deleting lock file, generating lock
> file in RPM post trans script, every team has its own way).
>
> Bundler is something we don't need. Actually, it's an obstacle we should
> rather get rid of. JBoss folks could tell stories (Maven)...
>
> LZ
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:28:44AM -0400, Michael Orazi wrote:
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Bryan Kearney" <bkearney at redhat.com>
>>>> To: katello-devel at redhat.com
>>>> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 8:23:25 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [katello-devel] where to get required katello gems
>>>>
>>>> On 07/16/2012 07:26 AM, Petr Chalupa wrote:
>>>>> I have a counter proposal which is more from Ruby world then the
>>>>> solution described in previous emails.
>>>>>
>>>>> - remove source
>>>>> 'http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/katello/gems/'
>>>>> and
>>>>> other sources from Gemfile
>>>>> - store all needed gems in vendor/cache as .gem files (directly
>>>>> in
>>>>> katello master or a git-submodule) (all versions for f16 and
>>>>> RHEL)
>>>>> - install gems with bundle install (without source specified
>>>>> bundler
>>>>> picks up gems from vendor/cache)
>>>>>
>>>>> Advantages:
>>>>> - you can install all required gems on any platform: fedora,
>>>>> ubuntu
>>>>> or
>>>>> osx (which I need)
>>>>> - faster installation
>>>>> - you can switch between fedora/RHEL env by replacing
>>>>> Gemfile.lock
>>>>> (lets
>>>>> say we would have Gemfile.lock.f16 and Gemfile.lock.rhel in our
>>>>> git
>>>>> for
>>>>> this purpose)
>>>>> - easy access to and updates of gem versions
>>>>> - you can include gems with CVE patches from fedora, everybody
>>>>> would
>>>>> have correct versions of gems (which I currently don't have)
>>>>>
>>>>> Disadvantages
>>>>> - rubygem-* rpms are not being correctly packed. The included
>>>>> .gem
>>>>> files
>>>>> are not containing CVE patches. We would need to come up with a
>>>>> workaround to build updated .gem files or fix the issue. If this
>>>>> is
>>>>> fixed, all you have to do to store gems in vendor/cache is
>>>>> 'bundle
>>>>> package' [1].
>>>>> - other possible problems i do not see, any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://gembundler.com/bundle_package.html
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Petr
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could we do this model for DEV, and then work on proper packaging
>>>> for
>>>> each distro? I think it would help alot if we could be more
>>>> friendly
>>>> to
>>>> DEVs.
>>>>
>>>> -- bk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> katello-devel mailing list
>>>> katello-devel at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
>>>>
>>>
>>> I said half jokingly on IRC the other day that we should have a
>>> 'katello-configure --developer' which would install everything for
>>> use with a git checkout. This would make it completely simple for
>>> anyone to get up and going with a dev setup. Perhaps they would just
>>> point to the git checkout:
>>>
>>> % katello-configure --developer /home/dudette/katello
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> katello-devel mailing list
>>> katello-devel at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
>>>
>>
>> There have been some similar discussions on aeolus-devel as well.  Perhaps we could put our heads together and come up with a common solution for both projects since we are dealing with similar concerns.
>>
>> Adding John Eckersberg and Jason Guiditta to the cc as they have been thinking a bit about both of these problems.  John has been pretty focussed on possible integrations in aeolus-configure and Jason has been working quite a bit about how to handle bundler such that it will act as one would expect regardless of whether they are an 'rpm based' developer or a 'pure ruby' developer.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> katello-devel mailing list
>> katello-devel at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
>