On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 18:28 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
Having already written most of Plague by the time OSBS came out, I
over pretty much everything about it when it was announced last year.
The purpose of the two do seem to overlap; however OSBS appears to have
a much larger scope. It appears to try to be the one-stop shop for
building _everything_ for any distribution with any build system or
source-control system; which is fine. The pitch in those slides was
basically "build your release packages on our buildsystem."
I don't think we want such a wide scope and fuzzy focus. I think Fedora
is better served by a specific, targetted system that builds _Fedora_
packages. That's a fairly parochial attitude, but one which I think is
in the best interest of Fedora. Given that everyone working on and
admining the Fedora Extras buildsystem is a volunteer, we don't need to
be spreading our resources out even further supporting something like
the OSBS. We should be concentrating on building excellent packages for
Fedora, and arguably nothing else; we cannot be everything to everybody
or we are doomed to fail.
The building of packages is such an important and code piece of a
distribution that it cannot _not_ be under the control of the project,
and it cannot _not_ be _accountable_ to the project. As more of the
Core responsibility gets spun out to the wider Fedora project, this only
becomes more critical. We need to be able to admin the systems, we need
to be able fix problems when they arise, we need to be able to
demonstrate accountability and security of the buildsystem. Without
that, there is no trust in the integrity of the distribution.
I agree with Dan's assessment. Furthermore, he's done a great job giving
fedora a buildsystem and we should continue to enhance it.
Additionally, it might be starting to be a good time to be afraid of
things with Novell's copyright over them. We'll never know what patents
we might be treading upon and only allowed to use provided we're not
with a company.