Update on Patch and mirroring KernelCI code


Don Brown <don.f.brown@...>
 

Hi Daniel,

I like the change to the patch and I'll incorporate it tonight.

We are already mirroring the KernelCI Backend and Frontend and I had almost the exact same thought this weekend that we already need to modify the code to get ours working. I don't mind doing this in the short term. However, this can be a slippery slope since we could easily get to the point where we've essentially forked their code.

I would prefer to work with the KernelCI upstream to incorporate our modifications into their code for the long-term.


Sincerely,

Don Brown. PMP
don.f.brown@...
Mobile: (317) 560-0513
Here's to Life, Linux and the Pursuit of Happiness

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:00 AM, <cip-dev-request@...> wrote:
Send cip-dev mailing list submissions to
        cip-dev@...

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        cip-dev-request@...project.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        cip-dev-owner@...project.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cip-dev digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: [PATCH] Use local copy of kernel-ci if present (Daniel Wagner)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:50:28 +0100
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...>
To: cip-dev@..., Don Brown <don.f.brown@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-dev] [PATCH] Use local copy of kernel-ci if present
Message-ID: <4566da15-839f-e88f-f812-095d7ee770ba@...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

Hi Don,

Over the weekend I had an idea to improve it even more:


GIT_SRC="https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-backend-config.git"
if [ -d /vagrant/kernelci-backend-config ]; then
    GIT_SRC=/vagrant/kernelci-backend-config
fi
git clone $GIT_SRC kernelci-backend


If there is a repo available on /vagrant we clone from it. I
think it would be even better just to copy the working
directory instead of cloning. That would allow to hack on the
files without committing all the time.

So this would change to:

if [ -d /vagrant/kernelci-backend-config ]; then
    cp -r /vagrant/kernelci-backend-config kernelci-backend
else
    git clone https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-backend-config.git kernelci-backend
fi

What do you think about this?

And another idea I had: we should create a mirror of kernelci sources
clone from the mirror. I am pretty sure soon we have some patches
which need to be around to get our setup running which aren't
available in the upstream repository. For example I had to do this here:


--- a/roles/install-deps/tasks/install-mongodb.yml
+++ b/roles/install-deps/tasks/install-mongodb.yml
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@

 - name: Add MongoDB apt key (Ubuntu)
   apt_key:  id=7F0CEB10
-            keyserver=hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com
+            keyserver=hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com:80
   when: ansible_lsb.id == "Ubuntu"
   tags:
     - install
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@

 - name: Add MongoDB apt key (Debian)
   apt_key:  id=EA312927
-            keyserver=hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com
+            keyserver=hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com:80
   when: ansible_lsb.id == "Debian"
   tags:
     - install

Thanks,
Daniel


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
cip-dev mailing list
cip-dev@...
https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev


End of cip-dev Digest, Vol 8, Issue 11
**************************************


Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...>
 

Hi Don,

On 01/23/2017 01:39 PM, Don Brown wrote:
I like the change to the patch and I'll incorporate it tonight.
Great.

We are already mirroring the KernelCI Backend and Frontend and I had
almost the exact same thought this weekend that we already need to
modify the code to get ours working. I don't mind doing this in the
short term. However, this can be a slippery slope since we could easily
get to the point where we've essentially forked their code.
I agree. There needs to be some strict rules for applying patches.

I would prefer to work with the KernelCI upstream to incorporate our
modifications into their code for the long-term.
Okay, understood. What about introducing a default configuration that
clones for upstream but it could be overwritten as config option?

Thanks,
Daniel