[OE-core] [PATCH 0/5] network based PR service

[Richard Purdie]

On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 14:02 +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2011/5/19 Richard Purdie <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org>
> 
> > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 13:01 +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> > > What should I do to either disable this for some recipes, or use a
> > > different (private) server?
> > > We do not wish to rely on an external server for proprietary recipes (or
> > for
> > > recipes for which we made a local change in an overlay).
> > > How is this case handled?
> >
> > This could be handled by doing things like setting:
> >
> > PRSERV_HOST_pn-myprivaterecipe = "somelocalhost"
> >
> > or
> >
> > PRSERV_HOST_pn-myprivaterecipe = ""
> >
> > to disable it.
> >
> > One thing we lack is a good way to apply changes like this, only if code
> > is within a given layer. Even in that case, it should be possible with
> > anonymous python to look at the location of the current .bb file and
> > then conditionally set these variables as appropriate to the right
> > server.
> >
> > Certainly this needs to be thought about and documented but I think
> > there are ways to do it.
> >
> > Pardon my ignorance, but I do not really understand the complete flow and
> way of working.
> 
> Anyway if I do something like:
>  PRSERV_HOST_pn-myprivaterecipe = ""
> would I still be able to use PR in my recipe (like I do today)?

Yes, since the PR server appends to this.

> Also we do have the issue that it is desired to be able to rebuild without
> network connectivity (e.g. while temporary offline while travelling). Would
> that still be possible?

You could use a local PR server. Obviously connecting to one central
server without any network connectivity isn't going to happen so we have
to be realistic about expectations.

To make a perfect rebuild the local PR server would need a dump of the
database on the central server. There isn't code for that at the moment
and I don't think its the highest priority task out there or the most
important use case but its certainly possible for someone to add.

> For layers, one solution could be to allow variable overriding on the
> overlay level. I can imagine there are more uses for that (and I understand
> this requires changes to the bitbake machinery).

There is certainly a use case for something like this. The exact
implementation and workings needs a lot more thought and discussion
though. I believe its at least already possible in anonymous python (and
if not, any extensions needed shouldn't be invasive by comparison).

Cheers,

Richard