<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>A laudable aim but do we have the man power to do it, without negatively affecting our existing schedules for illumos and stable releases?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Bye,<br>Deano<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Colin Ellis [mailto:panamayacht@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> 16 March 2011 11:46<br><b>To:</b> OpenIndiana Developer mailing list<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [oi-dev] Distribution build system<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Great idea, worth the pain!<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Andrzej Szeszo <<a href="mailto:aszeszo@gmail.com">aszeszo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi All<br><br>The project is moving forward very slowly. I my opinion one of the main reasons behind it is lack of unified distribution build system.<br><br>Previous releases were put together manually. Probably one or two core contributors would be be able to repeat the whole process at this point without investing significant amount of time into learning how things fit together. We need distribution release and publishing process to be automated and repeatable.<br><br>There is a significant amount of bug reports in OpenIndiana bug tracker. Many of bugs require very simple changes to get fixed. URL updates or branding updates for example. Many contributors are more than capable of fixing such bugs. Because it is not clear what goes where, and also how to build and then test things many contributors simply don't bother looking at bugs at all.<br><br>I am proposing creating a unified distribution build system. A system that would build the whole distribution after issuing a single "make publish" or similar command.<br><br>Having such system will let us to release early, release often. It should improve the development progress in general. Bugfixes and security updates would get integrated in no time. New users would have an easy start. We could point new contributors at the build system and simply ask them to start hacking. Having all consolidations referenced from a single build system would make it clear to them where things go. Base system changes, etc. - core consolidations, new software - add-on consolidation directory, and so on.<br><br>Continuous build system could be implemented using the same tools on the OpenIndiana build machines, including the SPARC ones.<br><br>Many people will say that this is not possible and that even Oracle is not doing it. I say such system is possible but will require significant amount of work and significant amount of time to prepare. It will be worth the effort if done right. All major open source OS distributions have the release process automated in one way or another. I think this is the key to our success. Splitting the build and release engineering process between consolidation maintainers/owners based on Oracle model proved to not to work well for us.<br><br>I would like to start a dialog between the core contributors about such build system. Discuss whether it is needed or not. And if the decision is made that it is needed - discuss requirements, technical details and then actually implement it!<br><br>Andrzej<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>oi-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:oi-dev@openindiana.org" target="_blank">oi-dev@openindiana.org</a><br><a href="http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev" target="_blank">http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>