most authoritative branch for bzr dev?

John Arbash Meinel john at arbash-meinel.com
Mon Jul 6 16:49:31 BST 2009


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>>>>>> "jam" == John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:
> 
>     jam> Martin Pool wrote:
>     >> I think we should point first to lp.  It may be faster because it has a
>     >> smart server, though at the moment only over ssh.
>     >> 
> 
>     jam> So the biggest headache we've had with this situation is that we often
>     jam> work from http://bazaar-vcs.org/bzr/bzr.dev's tip revision, and
>     jam> Launchpad hasn't mirrored it yet. So when we go to submit for review,
>     jam> everything gets royally messed up.
> 
> 
> Which made me wonder after thinking about Martin remark for a
> while that I may change my setup to be:
> - create all my branches from lp:bzr,
> - keep only my integration branch against bazaar-vcs.org since I
>   only really need the tighter sync when submitting to pqm, and
>   even then...
> 

Except when submitting, I find I often need to merge bzr.dev's tip in
order to get NEWS to merge correctly without conflicts. Otherwise, sure.
We could certainly submit reviews for review based on lp:bzr. (I always
branch my local bzr.dev copy which I keep very up-to-date. And I use
'bzr start' which looks at the 'submit:' branch, which I guess I could
change somehow to lp:bzr.)

> The former may be a good work-around against lp going mad when
> generating diffs for merge proposals (or lp:mad for short) :)
> 
>     jam> I believe Robert mentioned a while ago that we might be
>     jam> able to change PQM so that it actually manages "LP"
>     jam> branches. (So after doing the merge, test, commit it
>     jam> would push to lp:... rather than wherever the
>     jam> http://bazaar is currently at.)
> 
> Or just bind the pqm branch to bazaar-vcs.org.
> 
> 
>     jam> Of course, we've also recently had lots of failures for
>     jam> PQM trying to connect to lp: or bzr+ssh:// so maybe it
>     jam> isn't trivial to get it working.
> 
> What is the status there ? Who did work on the subject last
> (tricky question in a distributed team :-) ?
> 
>         Vincent
> 

Andrew was the last to encounter it. It seems to be a problem that the
LOSA's have to fix, but all of us have just worked around it by using
http://. My guess is they don't want outbound ssh connections from the
PQM machine, and we would have to push harder for them to get it working.

Especially considering that PQM then needs password-less access to
Launchpad (via ssh-key, but they either need an ssh-agent running or
have the key not require a password).

I'm pretty sure the machine is as secure as is reasonable, just not sure
what their policy on bots with ssh-keys is.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkpSHQsACgkQJdeBCYSNAAN6oQCgpbkarDZ7AmPUDkbABI63hjBJ
QZgAoL6tNmUQTQXAw0qNn6RfP6d29Pkk
=5lAO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the bazaar mailing list