[Pulp-dev] Proposal to replace pulp 2.15's nightly jobs

Preethi Thomas pthomas at redhat.com
Fri Nov 10 16:50:13 UTC 2017

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jeremy Audet <jaudet at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hosting packages in just one place is simpler than hosting packages in
>>> multiple places. There's
>>> less room for error when the simpler thing is done.
>> It shouldn't be too hard to set up.
> Fair enough. I also think that hosting packages on one location helps to
> prevent end-user confusion. But we can host packages wherever is
> appropriate, and I don't have a terribly strong opinion here.
>> I would probably want to keep it in a 'nightly' or 'master'
>> folder instead of a versioned folder, to help aign the intent of
>> explicitly distinguishing this
>> workflow from others.  Thoughts?
> Yes, please. If there's a directory called "2.15," then I think that
> there's a 2.15 release. If there's a directory called "nightly" or
> "master," then I think that there are nightly builds, or builds from master.
> To nitpick: I like the idea "master" a little bit more. What if we
> improved our development and build processes so that there were two builds
> in a day? "master" reflects the idea that the builds come from the master
> branch, whereas "nightly" reflects the idea that there's one build per day.

Just for clarification, What branch will  Nightly  be built from? And Won't
Nightly and Master be getting the build from same branch (master) majority
of the time?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20171110/e8533e67/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list