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

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2011/5/19 Richard Purdie <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org>

> 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.
>

I'd say it would already be nice if some caching is being done locally (just
like is done with e.g. downloads).

>
> > 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).
>
> Hm. you consider this PR change to be non-invasive?

BTW I am not saying it is not good, and I understand the problem that you
want to solve, but I feel this could require some more thought wrt the
issues I raised before in this thread (and some more documentation and usage
info).

Frans.