Re: Managed Release Plan 2.0

Daniel Farrell

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:54 PM Robert Varga <nite@...> wrote:
On 18/10/2018 15:53, Daniel Farrell wrote:
> Reviving a very old thread, thinking we should start discussing on
> today's integration call.
> Also, from an Int/Pack perspective, two thoughts:
> * It was a mess to have "two" Fluorine releases (Managed, Manged+Self).
> That really doesn't work with version numbers.

Agreed, but I think we will at some point arrive at two releases:
Platform and Managed Apps...

In the spirit of common contributions to Managed projects, I might could do this level of split. It would be a huge TODO though.

> * If we end up going with a single Managed-only distro as the official
> release, and ask Self-Managed projects to produce their own release
> artifacts, I don't think we'd be able to support packaging those as
> RPMs/Debs. I can imagine ways to do it technically, but I can't allocate
> cycles to drive that work. If a Self-Managed project wants RPMs/Debs
> they would need to contribute.

How difficult it to maintain that?

Just to maintain, maybe .1-.2 FTE.
How much of the current work is really project-specific?

That's the thing, it's not project-specific at all, it's whole-ODL-specific.
Can we just have a job, which turns org.opendaylight.PROJECT into an RPM
based on the recommended project layout/feature.xml analysis?

It would be an entirely new packaging/CD pipeline. *head explodes gif*-level of work.


Join { to automatically receive all group messages.