From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 25 01:14:15 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56F3A421 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 01:14:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-x22a.google.com (mail-pb0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A3F51D68 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 01:14:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id jt11so3887627pbb.1 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:14:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=639yDEUTbm1c8GA68vkkDyjo0zjo7wUUSeafWSTBPhY=; b=Fq583Q7d52J43M+FYqP1kKL9Pw4edv00jWNeVARGbF2KNu+NP9NTmR3hIweLWsuGL6 q2vmgsyCPG42tA7Pp889Uq4eeIcI2YyWuj02T8l6X8wIigdeeVZHpk2f0DcqaptzE9nC bQZ5FGvtxOPULWIkiIrtV7neL2MMqaptXbUfqBRkP1w1pgwRWEq39EeS/ZLlNWfCSfua pzGFSBGSxSyTi5y4cmB7umc9ePgUJk4+ydn7rv642alk4leOVKo+Nq2eAptQ98QNY5ac Bvz+vWWKARgVj3pOxM5q8t6yJZA+VUBCF+M7GPRtNeWfhEPELOSducvs4PKNzDaiW0o7 zG1Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.171.229 with SMTP id ax5mr17254055pbc.125.1390612454756; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:14:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.155.38 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:14:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 20:14:14 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? From: Aryeh Friedman To: Big Lebowski , FreeBSD Ports ML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 01:14:15 -0000 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 wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Aryeh Friedman > wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Big Lebowski 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