From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6473366578589073408 X-Received: by 10.28.184.78 with SMTP id i75mr157277wmf.30.1508406869075; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 02:54:29 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: isar-users@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.28.168.14 with SMTP id r14ls1274592wme.3.canary-gmail; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 02:54:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+TtF9Y4dZOlKJzloVd3Kk9zsFiXWqtQYmtUf2EX19bDGgn1HftPCWBb8jCQhxfLoPPRJeL/ X-Received: by 10.28.215.195 with SMTP id o186mr146417wmg.9.1508406868283; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 02:54:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1508406868; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=s5FASVRPrb8acpH45lz6jZk2EYCiMd+WBBcsfVcc2uKNgu1FI3R4+2BQeNvSHLfFgh v/qWF5JqysnMB+ryI2jwS90UzILLMaUDpvtDaWNNnrfJ6tlCUfXSbxFGynA7wIzGMHi0 VTarwfjf1zHodlNXURORaXABGBLluJZZIBKtqlZL8VoqCqhfronEACqc7+OoHlrzkVPz Ai5EHN44BLllDQYD+MlPeiGGBVHTmP4Li5jx4s4zqR48usoi8A/uXQTubr7Sxoh3sxHt 0RnB75Eh6k55MbHRENR50A28WtGoXyAnov9piG0QVtYbXCF3ASdKlhj9I9pvHljPj9H5 hwLw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=iG5OaSoaMRV8LV9jyMPun5lfCUfb3mOlEBll6mpNvtg=; b=trgwScFoA2AyL8ZZzZPZhn2wUdOAS3umcD+yG+wUuj+FGEbdYYgSzGSqTcFUD9hy3g fcery2H6bAipaLcxPJDUiFf4urcYorzcfnmME1IS0D2HX7L3LZjieJoY/5f/bw89Yep8 ZYb7gDZSjQgH2wqTltcVUM3fZnXnF4+ZY6BdnTl5wiYfJGVIzbZy7Nb37MDC1DDUm8fx bR4zcTqXvCY5Ju97idOFacSraEwD669Ls8SkGJSugXILmsnW52Zcy7plCtgTdtke20nQ ipMQRR2/Jw8OkKmm1baBoPlDYva4zVlLwMIxQyBfv7QeXb4YKl2kQtPo3H3jLCXUsKqf NPyA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Return-Path: Received: from aqmola.ilbers.de (aqmola.ilbers.de. [85.214.62.211]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d82si67936wmd.1.2017.10.19.02.54.28 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Oct 2017 02:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) client-ip=85.214.62.211; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Received: from yssyq.radix50.net (p2E51B650.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.81.182.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by aqmola.ilbers.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id v9J9sQDO022836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 11:54:27 +0200 Received: from yssyq.radix50.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yssyq.radix50.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8) with ESMTP id v9J9sPjN002026 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 11:54:25 +0200 Received: (from ibr@localhost) by yssyq.radix50.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id v9J9sP20002025 for isar-users@googlegroups.com; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 11:54:25 +0200 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 11:54:25 +0200 From: Baurzhan Ismagulov To: isar-users@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4 v5] Isar apt deployment Message-ID: <20171019095425.GA5691@yssyq.radix50.net> Mail-Followup-To: isar-users@googlegroups.com References: <20171005100807.3369-1-asmirnov@ilbers.de> <20171009140006.219154c8@md1em3qc> <20171018154404.25953ccd@md1em3qc> <20171019104145.1b985144@md1em3qc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171019104145.1b985144@md1em3qc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-TUID: l+ZBJZFAm1Uu On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:41:45AM +0200, Henning Schild wrote: > I will try to provide you with a way to reproduce the issue and will > look at the patch you attached. That would be great. You don't even need to spend time providing a minimal use case; I suggest that you provide your tree(s) as is off-list and we look at that with high priority. > Still the whole series went into next while it was still under review and > still had open points. The feature was in discussion since 2017-08-27. The last open points -- EEXIST and meta-isar-bin -- were addressed in v5. After no comments followed, the series was merged. It's after that that you report a build problem with an unpublished layer and suggest a completely new architecture. Under these circumstances, my suggestion is to make use of the existing feature v1 -- CIP and other people need that -- and implement the new architecture in v2. > That said i do not understand why you refuse to take it back out, i can > not work on next since these patches are in and i can not even test the > new stuff that was merged on top, same might be true for other > developers. Because the series works for all use cases known to us. You are demanding to block the feature till you resolve the problem. But the win-win solution is to solve your problem. This is what we should aim at. We get mails from you since ten days, but what we would like to have is 1. your tree, as is, and 2. feedback to Alex's patch -- I see that as a homework before demanding the same for the third time. > Also the next q is getting pretty long We had intended to do a merge to master in Sep, but failed to do so. Merging the queues while short is exactly what we are trying to achieve right now. With kind regards, Baurzhan.