From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EdbNw-0002sn-CM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:40:40 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJMdwaT009939; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:39:58 GMT Received: from jaguar.lieber.org (jaguar.lieber.org [217.160.252.168]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJMcCtp017595 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:38:13 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAAF29C1F3 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:42:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jaguar.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (jaguar.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05862-15 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6684E29C101; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:42:41 +0000 From: Kurt Lieber <klieber@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41 Message-ID: <20051119224241.GC12982@mail.lieber.org> References: <20051119170615.GW12982@mail.lieber.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="A3RWl4qWgABmkY4K" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051119170615.GW12982@mail.lieber.org> X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-3.3, AWL=0.006, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -5.893 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: 4b4bfdd5-20c8-4e0c-b49f-cf9cf98cfb4f X-Archives-Hash: d19d9806e2e469428bd6168cc31dd4c1 --A3RWl4qWgABmkY4K Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:06:15PM +0000 or thereabouts, Kurt Lieber wrote: > For instance, the way GLEP 41 suggests doing r/o cvs is not going to work. So, in the interests of trying to find a solution to this particular problem... As I understand the GLEP, the main requirement here is to give the arch testers faster access to the ebuilds in CVS. Is this accurate? =20 If so, is there any reason we have to use CVS? Lance and I are both concerned about the extra load that another 50-100 people (extrapolating =66rom the 20 folks that amd64 says they have currently) will place on cvs.g.o and I'd rather break this out onto a separate server. One proposal being discussed is setting up a dedicated rsync server for this purpose that a) syncs from CVS more frequently and b) has no ban limits imposed on it. Arch testers would have some way of authenticating to the box and being able to sync as frequently as they wanted to. Current goal is to have all data in this new repository within 30 minutes of it hitting CVS. (current average is about 1 hour) If the requirement is for r/o CVS access to the same CVS server that the pure-blooded developers use (sorry, couldn't resist) then it may require upgrades to our existing server and/or purchasing a new server. =20 --kurt --A3RWl4qWgABmkY4K Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDf6phJPpRNiftIEYRAujZAKCbJ5YLZ8T1izd9WkVqGRHFME1xkwCggbIB DU9dv7+Ea13et5UvcnjaE8k= =1mRd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --A3RWl4qWgABmkY4K-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list