launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Gary Poster <gary.poster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 1, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Robert Collins wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom Haddon wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 15:22 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> > > On Sep 1, 2009, at 3:17 PM, Gary Poster wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sep 1, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Tom Haddon wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 14:34 -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
> > > > > > Gary Poster <gary.poster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > > > > > But Tom, does touching devpad affect production too?  If so,  
> > > > > > > does
> > > > > > > someone know if production is using storm from sourcecode or a  
> > > > > > > tgz?
> > > > > > Tom can give an authoritative answer about production, but we are
> > > > > > *supposed* to have no devpad dependencies in Launchpad proper
> > > > > > now.  If
> > > > > > we have any, it's a bug.
> > > > > Do you mean I can remove all sourcecode directories? This isn't
> > > > > something I was aware of, but would be more than happy to if it  
> > > > > can
> > > > > be
> > > > > confirmed.
> > > >
> > > > Karl is referring to how we build our developer instances.  We  
> > > > don't
> > > > use devpad for that.  We do use devpad for production.
> >
> > Ok, is this going to make our plans for a buildbot instance for
> > production problematic? The problem is that currently it would always
> > use the latest version of sourcecode dirs, when that might not  
> > actually
> > be what we want in production....
>
>
> Configs can specify exact revisions, if needed.

Hm, cool.  We may need to explore something like that, because you are  
right, this is problematic, and I don't have an answer ATM.

Gary