+1 from me for sharing. Doesn't have to be GH, though, a tarball of the combined repo would be fine (for now?). That way us devs could begin updating their systems locally with Synth and the ports tree that will be used by the build machine. Can't hurt to test this on a couple of machines!ASX wrote:However we could consider to make the merged tree available from github ... we will have to decide about that.
building our source tree
Re: building our source tree
Re: building our source tree
I will share the script to merge the two trees, that will allow devs to have exactly the same source tree locally.kraileth wrote:+1 from me for sharing. Doesn't have to be GH, though, a tarball of the combined repo would be fine (for now?). That way us devs could begin updating their systems locally with Synth and the ports tree that will be used by the build machine. Can't hurt to test this on a couple of machines!ASX wrote:However we could consider to make the merged tree available from github ... we will have to decide about that.
(just give me the time to make it better, with some parameter to be easily customized to fit each one filesystem setup).
The decision to share the source tree was already took, the question is "how".
ZFS is an excellent tool to send a filesystem (or a tree) from our builder to the webserver, assuming we place the source tree, the pkgs, and the build logs under the same dataset tree, we will grant they will be always in sync.
A problem to solve is how to make a repo update "atomic", I was thinking to disable the webserver for the time of the transfer from builder to webserver ...