Hi -project,
Many years ago I created an IRC bot for Debian that would live on
its own channel and simply notify on new uploads, bugs and similar
changes in that distribution:
https://chris-lamb.co.uk/projects/debian-devel-changes-bot
… it is now rather popular and, indeed, many people have noted to me
in the interim years not only how motivating it was to be exposed to
others' work like that without having to explicitly or actively
look for it but it informs & keeps them up-to-date on the project
in a wider, less-technical, sense.
I found it also a valuable learning tool — if I don't understand a
bug report that scrolls past I sometimes click it and invariably
end up learning something I didn't previously know.
§
In this light, I created the following ticket early last year to
get this rolling for PureOS:
https://tracker.pureos.net/T375
… however, movement on this appears to have stalled or otherwise is
lower on others' priority lists than I believe it should be.
The basic idea would be to have a separate "dev/pureos/changes" (or
similarly named) Matrix room that would have this info spammed into
it. Discussions would remain on dev/pureos or, of course, on issue
tracker, etc.
The bug itself unfortunately is a little ambiguous about what we
would like to include in the notifications (tracker bugs vs uploads
vs Git commits...), but I firmly and adamently believe that getting
*anything* at the moment would be great start so I wasn't being
overly specific by design. (The task is also being tracked in
parallel on the sysadmin tasks tracker too, adding somewhat to the
confusion.)
Note that this would also help relieve some developers of feeling
like they are the only ones who know about certain areas,
preventing further potential "siloing" of knowledge.
Just to underline, whilst it might appear to be a "wishlist"
feature, I believe it will provide some always-needeed social
cohesion and connection within the PureOS development team! As
geeks we often criminally underrated such things.. we are humans
too!
Any thoughts? In particular, can we get some strong +1's from you
all (especially Jeremiah) to take back to the ticket and hopefully
parley that into getting this reprioritised?
Best wishes,
--
Chris Lamb
https://puri.sm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
We have a rather sizable backlog of issues around the PureBrowser:
https://tracker.pureos.net/project/board/1/
I point this out not as a criticism of Jonas, the PureBrowser
maintainer, but to highlight that we do not have a clear, distilled
policy document that might mitigate some of the issues in the backlog.
One example is this issue: https://tracker.pureos.net/T699 That issue
comes from a video of PureOS which makes some inaccurate claims. The
video was linked in our bug tracker and I went through the video and
pulled out the claims so that they can be refuted, T699 tracks one such
claim of not having httpseverywhere enabled per default.
Having a policy for an issue like this would allow someone to quickly
go to our policy, quote it in the issue tracker and/or demonstrate that
in fact we do have httpseverywhere installed, and then close the bug
which I feel is a positive outcome. As it stands now, we have a lot of
issues that seem to attract a lot of commentary but little change is
effecutated. For me the point of an issue tracker is to track the
progress of the issue to the point where it is no longer an issue and
it is closed. Is this a shared view from folks on this list?
Regards,
jeremiah
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=a8Ly
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi Jeremiah,
> > You mentioned to me «en passant» recently that you had built ISO
> > images of PureOS. I was wondering whether you had documented the
> > process for doing this yet?
>
> I have not documented this yet. I have been merely building packages so
> far, I have every intention of building images. So far my approach is
> to follow whatever info I can get from Matthias and use that
> information to build up the wiki. At the moment I cannot find the
> information on building images on the wiki, but I'm determined to find
> or create it.
Great stuff! Any progress on this? :)
Best wishes,
--
Chris Lamb
https://puri.sm
Hi Jeremiah et al.,
You mentioned to me «en passant» recently that you had built ISO
images of PureOS. I was wondering whether you had documented the
process for doing this yet?
(My motivation is to push forward on reproducible builds of said
images as discussed.)
Best wishes,
--
Chris Lamb
https://puri.sm
Hi Jeremiah,
Thanks for your reply. :) I don't disagree with anything specific in
your mail but think we should just briefly pause and zoom out here:
> > > Whilst extremely kind of them, how will this work for our users?
>
> For power users we can simply […]
>
> > Do you mean how do we enable our users to easily take advantage of
> > the mirrors? E.g. not having to edit source.list.d/ by hand?
>
> Ideally the 'Software' tool from GNOME might be a good candidate [..]
>
> > > Ask them to alter their sources.list? Are we going to commit to
> > > providing a CDN of some description?
>
> I intend to speak to […]
So, again, these are all very sensible replies & solutions and
furthermore I'm not at all against the conceptual idea of a mirror,
but I am just wondering whether introducing such infrastructure (with
all the inherent technical and support overheads) should appear to be
so high on our priority list right now? :)
Best wishes,
--
Chris Lamb
https://puri.sm
Jeremiah wrote:
> There are some folks who're will to mirror our PureOS distro which is
> very generous of them.
Alas, I fear this is a bigger question that just rsync daemon
settings. :)
Whilst extremely kind of them, how will this work for our users?
Ask them to alter their sources.list? Are we going to commit to
providing a CDN of some description?
Even a round-robin DNS solution has issues in that we have no
immediate, insight or control over whether any "non-official"
mirror is up-to-date, something obviously important from a user
point of view.
Thoughts?
Best wishes,
--
Chris Lamb
https://puri.sm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
There are some folks who're will to mirror our PureOS distro which is
very generous of them. One of them, linux.pizza (
https://mirror.linux.pizza/) recommends we use rsync to support
mirrors. There is another potential mirror in the US who'll work with
rsync too.
What are the recommended locations to point our rsync daemon at so that
other sites might mirror our repos? This is what they mirror for
Debian; https://mirror.linux.pizza/debian/
Regards,
Jeremiah
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=51Sb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----