launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Martin Pool <mbp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1 July 2010 19:15, Tom Haddon <tom.haddon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Erm, yeah, we also have an RT for this - RT#38985. Can we decide whether
> we're at the stage of an RT, and if so move the discussion to there, and
> if not, close the RT?

Let's close it for now.

(I think historically there was an idea outside of IS that you should
create an RT if you wanted to talk with IS about an issue, in the same
way you might file a bug without knowing precisely how it ought to be
fixed.  It now seems to me that an RT is an actual request and you
shouldn't file one until you have a pretty good idea what you want to
request, and you should start in mail or a bug instead.  Hence this
mail.)

> My main concern here is avoiding unnecessary complication. We already
> treat the "production" codebrowse as an "edge" service in that we
> rollout to it whenever there's new code. This is mainly because it needs
> restarting enough anyway that it can't really be considered a "stable"
> service, and if we have a "stable" and an "edge" service, we'd just be
> restarting two services instead of one. I think it'd be better to
> continue with the current setup until we get to the point where
> codebrowse doesn't need restarting between Launchpad releases. Then we
> can think about splitting it out into "production" and "edge" instances.

>From what's been said in this thread it doesn't seem there's any
benefit in doing it now, so let's shelve it until we either do have a
stable/slow-moving branch, or until Max needs a dogfood.l.n-like test
environment.  That's fine with me, I just wanted to get a decision.

-- 
Martin