[Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring

[Scott Little]

We have a green sanity.

The freeze is now lifted.

There is a spreadsheet [1] that maps the location of packages from old 
to new.

Scott

[1] 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zURL1UlDST8lnvw3dMlNWN6pkLX6EVF6TDBwNR9TQik/edit#gid=1697053

On 2019-09-06 9:38 a.m., Scott Little wrote:
> The docker image build was also successful.
>
> Scott
>
> On 2019-09-06 12:19 a.m., Little, Scott wrote:
>> We have a successful ISO build on CENGN.  I will be launching a 
>> second build to test docker image creation.
>>
>> I still recommend we stay frozen for one more day while we await a 
>> sanity result.  You can however start looking at the new code structure.
>>
>> A warning however.  The paths to our most active repos has changed.  
>> The 'stx-' prefix has been dropped from must repos.  e.g. 
>> cgcs-root/stx/stx-integ is now just cgcs-root/stx/integ.  What this 
>> meens is that a 'repo sync --force-sync' will delete 
>> cgcs-root/stx/stx-integ and create cgcs-root/stx/integ from scratch.  
>> It won't just move the repo to the new install path. Deleting the old 
>> path mean any work you may have saved in a side branch or in stash 
>> will be gone!
>>
>> I strongly recommend you do one of two things.
>>
>> 1) Back up your work somewhere outside of the directory structure 
>> controlled by the repo tool before you 'repo sync ...'
>>
>> 2) Set up a new root directory and start fresh with 'repo init ...' 
>> and 'repo sync ...'
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Scott Little [scott.little at windriver.com]
>> *Sent:* September 4, 2019 9:50 AM
>> *To:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring
>>
>> Reminder
>>
>> Please treat the code base as frozen.  No gerrit reviews, other than 
>> the restructuring reviews I'll be publishing today, should be 
>> receiving a WF+1 until further notice.
>>
>> Thanks for your cooperation.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> On 2019-09-03 2:33 p.m., Scott Little wrote:
>>> Pending a final green sanity result, the tentative restructure day 
>>> will be Sept 4 (tomorrow).
>>>
>>> Please freeze ALL code submissions, starting at 1 pm UTC on Sept 4, 
>>> until further notice.
>>>
>>> I'll be running a repo split tool. It will generate more than a 
>>> dozen code reviews that will ALL have to be merged before we can 
>>> unfreeze the code for general updates.
>>>
>>> After everything has merged, you'll need to ...
>>>
>>> 1) If you are working on code that has not been relocated (refer to 
>>> spreadsheet [3]) then 'repo sync --force-sync' be sufficient. Before 
>>> doing that, be sure to save your work as a commit on a private 
>>> working branch.
>>>
>>> 2) If your working on code that has been relocated,  Then your best 
>>> bet is to start with a fresh 'repo init' into a new working 
>>> directory.  Use 'git format-patch' or 'diff' to capture your work, 
>>> and apply the patch at the new location.   Some surgery to path 
>>> names may be required.
>>>
>>> Scott Little
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2019-08-30 4:09 p.m., Scott Little wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The layered build feature is getting ready for its initial required 
>>>> changes [1] [2].
>>>>
>>>> The first phase is a restructuring of the StarlingX git repos to 
>>>> enable layered builds in the next phase.  In light of new package 
>>>> additions in the last few weeks, there has been a few modifications 
>>>> and additions to the spreadsheet [3] documenting all the intended 
>>>> moves.  Edits are in blue text.  The intent is that all package 
>>>> relocations will be history preserving.
>>>>
>>>> We plan to implement the git restructuring on the week of September 
>>>> 3-6.
>>>>
>>>> My initial ask of the StarlingX community is that we *temporarily 
>>>> freeze the addition of any new packages* while we make a final test 
>>>> run.  This means that any updates that touch a centos_pkgs_dir file 
>>>> should not receive a WF+1 until the relocation is complete.  After 
>>>> the relocation, you may need to re-issue your code review.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your co-operation.
>>>>
>>>> Scott Little
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/672288/ 
>>>> <https://review.opendev.org/#/c/672288/>
>>>>
>>>> [2] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2006166 
>>>> <https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2006166>
>>>>
>>>> [3] 
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zURL1UlDST8lnvw3dMlNWN6pkLX6EVF6TDBwNR9TQik/edit#gid=1697053891 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20190909/7a4af4c3/attachment-0001.html>