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

Robin Chan rchan at redhat.com
Fri Nov 10 16:54:02 UTC 2017

I need to understand the proposed change for builds, but I can do that

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.
> +1 on calling it master (and master-2) and not 2.15. This confused me.

> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20171110/c8d916fb/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list