launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Michael Nelson <michael.nelson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Currently on the BuildBRanchToArchiveUI page at:

https://dev.launchpad.net/BuildBranchToArchiveUI#Still%20requiring%20thought

we have:

~username/+archive/mytargetppa/+builds : needs to display different
types of builds, rather than just binary builds (bug 536700)

That is, our initial thinking was that we should update the current
PPA +builds traversal to include SPRecipeBuilds (and potentially
others), and that the individual builds themselves would also be
traversed in this PPA context.

I was recently convinced by Cody (who has other motives ;)) at our
soyuz sprint that it could be a Bad Idea. His point was (correct me
where necessary Cody) that a SPRecipeBuild is only related to a PPA
because the resulting source package will be uploaded to the PPA. That
is, the resulting source package belongs in soyuz in the PPA context,
but the recipe builds associated with a recipe should be traversed via
the recipe. This would be a cleaner separation of responsibility
(enabling further separation of the different apps in the future
etc.).

Note: that is not to say that we wouldn't indicate on the PPA page
that there are SPRecipeBuilds currently in progress targeting the PPA
(view/template layer info), just that the SPRBuild isn't traversed via
the PPA and merged with the soyuz binary builds.

I just checked the code teams initial cut document at:
https://dev.launchpad.net/BuildBranchToArchiveUI/InitialCut

and saw there that a recipe will already have it's build history (ie.
recipe_url/+builds), so it would seem to make sense to present the
builds themselves under this traversal and only be a small step.

Even if it is decided to go ahead with bug 536700, presenting the
SPRBuilds under the recipe may be worthwhile as a first-cut.

Thoughts?