On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 01:02:09 +0200 Stasiek Michalski
But why? It encourages to contribute to the software which you can run on your favourite distro afterwards :D
No it doesn't - something built in OBS for Fedora or Ubuntu isn't magically suddenly available for openSUSE. Other distributions have other standards (I would argue lesser ones), and we shouldn't compromise openSUSE's quality needlessly.
I mean, that's a fair point, but what if Fedora had an official instance interconnected with openSUSE instance.
This would - at least for me - impli that Fedora will shut down (or at least use less) their own build system. If you have any contacts to developers/decision makers on Fedora site, I'm happy to jump into the discussion with them.
I feel like the bigger issue here is that there were trials of making OBS work on other distros, but were never considered beyond that.
Let's discuss/see if those trials came from openSUSE people, who tried to convince other distributions from OBS - or real decision makers from other distributions, who tried to get it to work on their distributions?
It's almost as if people doing that hard work on porting are afraid of the reaction of OBS team to this kind of submission, even though it would not hurt openSUSE packaging in any way. There is a huge __**BUT**__ here though, it would make SLE11 (general support just ended, still on LTSS support for 3 years) incapable of running OBS due to lack of systemd, and incompatibility of sysv scripts between SLE and RHEL just makes this harder to support fully.
I guess we have some misunderstanding here.
1) OBS is not an official product
While SUSE is using OBS to build his packages and products, OBS is not
selled to customers as product on its own. So there is no need for SUSE
to do nasty stuff or support OBS to run on old distributions.
JFYI: all OBS instances run either on SLE15 or even SLE15-SP1.
The worker images run even sometimes Tumbleweed or the latest Leap
(15.1 in this regard). This depends more on the reliability (kernel,
toolchain) of the distro on different architectures and the needs of
the to build packages than anything else.
2) Support for SysVinit is still there for a reason
We still have some glitches, if the services are managed via systemd.
Especially the "reload" or "restart" handling might be easy for generic
services, but sadly not many of the OBS services are generic.
Just have a look at the OBS sources and issues in Github - we have some
open issues there and working since a while on fixes for them. Feel
free to join the discussions there and drive the porting from systemd
to sysvinit to a success.
3) Time - the ugly enemy
If we had enough time, I'm sure that some of my team members whould try
a lot of things. Even to get OBS working on all possible distributions.
But I have to admit that the BuildOPS team (FYI: we are responsible for
package reviews, help with product building, the SUSE maintenance chain,
OBS backend development, PackageHUB, OBS operations and other, non-OBS
related stuff) has not enough manpower to spent this time during
working hours.
So - for me - it is just logical that the SUSE team behind OBS
concentrates on the deliverables they have towards their sponsor SUSE.
That does not mean that we as developers would not accept merge
requests or patches (and indeed, I can show you a lot of patches from
other distributions that went into OBS code) - that just means that our
focus is not on this task.
I have to admit that I did not see a concrete point in your blaming of
OBS developers for not being supportive enough (I guess you did not
want to blame anyone personally, but please accept that your claims
could be interpreted in this way). But I offer my help (and I'm up
for personal discussions, if you like) here to clarify any
misunderstandings.
With kind regards,
Lars
--
Lars Vogdt