Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 20:14:14 -0500 From: Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Big Lebowski <spankthespam@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? Message-ID: <CAGBxaXktaE6-zMZdv2aFvhe5b6oz58o=n_1mgD161a=_hDKQ1w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAHcXP%2Bew5qt5hc9Y%2BR_njPkfhUMsDDAqNk9aYSacV4PwBmqjfw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAHcXP%2Bf6e-t--XbQPTH1goJp_CL7P=zTj5trZVWd4YZ_EsO9gw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGBxaX=t3e5SXoBDHnzAbx=SWbEFMJHNPQL13FnwNgKWM3gCiA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHcXP%2Bew5qt5hc9Y%2BR_njPkfhUMsDDAqNk9aYSacV4PwBmqjfw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I would be willing to help write some scripts to start/stop the VM's (PetiteCloud does a command line that will be better documented and such in the next version or two) On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Big Lebowski <spankthespam@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Big Lebowski <spankthespam@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I wanted to ask about the growing time of reaction to ports PR's - what >>> is >>> the problem? It seems to me, as a ports contributor, that this time is >>> only >>> growing, not shrinking, and there's no formal/automated procedures that >>> would help in managing the issue. >>> >>> Today I found myself fighting with ezjail only to discover it has issues >>> working on FreeBSD 10.0-R. Great, I thought, there must be something >>> else, >>> so I went to make the research. It appears there isnt much more, and the >>> alternatives are qjail that seems to be quite dated and zjails, that's >>> not >>> in ports. Not long after looking into zjails, what seems to be a great >>> tool, I found its port submission sits there since... September 2013. >>> Now, >>> given the fact the Docker is on mouth of everyone, and containers are >>> getting a lot of attention, FreeBSD looks really bad with no tools to >>> manage such great technology like Jails, especially when ezjail, >>> unofficial >>> industry standard to manage jails, is now broken and zjails waits to be >>> accepted (or even rejected) for so much time. >>> >>> >> Why not test on a VM instead of a jail it seems this is a even more >> accurate test because you can run bare metal installs (I have run to some >> ports [including some of my own]) that worked with jail/tinderbox but >> failed a full bare metal install. Take a look at -virtualization@ for >> ideas, the proposed handbook entry on virtualization ( >> http://www.petitecloud.org) or just use a front end like petitecloud >> (yes yet an other port waiting for comitting [one this one there are some >> bugs though]) >> >> What is the problem? Isnt there enought commiters? Isnt there a automated >>> PR handling procedure reminding commiters with relevant access about such >>> submissions? Can we help? I hope to spark some discussion. >>> >> >> I have made a couple of scripts for automated this for specific ports but >> not for all (the VM test method)... if you want I can post them (they are >> high;y specific to installing the petitecloud port though) >> > >> -- >> Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org >> > > I think you've got me wrong - I am following freebsd-virtualization list > very closely, and the matter I've touched here is not my doubt on which > technology I should use, but rather a complaint on the state of jails > related tools directly leading to the delays in handling of ports related > PR's. I know the technology alternatives, I am decided to jails for a > reason, and I also know your work on the web interface focusing on bhyve, > but its not about it. > > B. > -- Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGBxaXktaE6-zMZdv2aFvhe5b6oz58o=n_1mgD161a=_hDKQ1w>