:: Re: [devuan-dev] [DNG] ci.devuan.o…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Jaromil
To: dng
CC: devuan-dev
New-Topics: [DNG] Of confidence and support and the future of Devuan., [devuan-dev] Of confidence and support and the future of Devuan.
Subject: Re: [devuan-dev] [DNG] ci.devuan.org is down

I'm sorry the communication needs to be decontextualized and shifted
around, we are obviously handling an "internal" reorganisation of
Devuan's tasks and responsibilities and everyone who is cabable here
is welcome to get involved via the devuan-dev list.

I'll reply here in order to clarify for those curious and then move
back to the other list.

On Sat, 20 Apr 2019, Daniel Reurich wrote:

> I was working on that server because I had discovered all source build
> jobs would fail consistently at between 4 and 6 seconds with a killed
> process. These jobs run on the master node, ie on this server as the
> jenkins user. I had discussed the issue with parazyd the day before,
> but he could offer no answers as to the consistent build failures across
> all the source jobs I'd tried.

wild guess: /var full

given some planning, we can definitely find out.

I'd like to clarify to all readers that this glitch constitutes no
treath to Devuan's integrity and that other caretakers have been more
consistently monitoring and studying the CI current installation and
planned evolution so this is just about recapping and clarifying that
interventions need to be planned.

> With KatolaZ gone, I'm the only other regular package builder these
> days.

this is a false statement. We build regularly packages on our own CI
at Dyne and even more people at maemo-leste. We have duplicated the
build infra in order to experiment and improve without affecting
Devuan. We are now ready to contribute upstream (to Devuan) our
progresses. Meanwhile Dan please do not take any initiative without
agreeing with all caretakers.

> Also as far as I'm aware, I'm pretty much the only person who has been
> hands on with that server in any meaningful way particularly with
> respect to maintenance and support for it.

this is a false statement as well. I am actually worried by this.

> Given that my particular
> domain within Devuan has been heavily oriented in the build system then
> I think it's reasonable that when it's broke I don't need to wait for a
> full committee to get an approval to fix it - particularly given it was
> an urgent issue and essentially all builds were broken.

Daniel, you do need to wait, enjoy the Easter and later communicate
all your thoughts and intentions regarding Devuan since we need to
re-align everyone to reality.

> In the normal circumstances, yes I agree that is reasonable. This
> wasn't routine maintenance. This was problem solving where I'd
> spent many hours over 2 days working on the issue before deciding a
> reboot was a reasonable next move.

I'm sorry for that. The outcome is a problem for everyone, more hours
to be spent by more people and during holidays. I hope you reconsider
this course of action as an error on your side.

> I agree, and I'm happy to work with whomever is interested in getting it
> back up and running as soon as we can.


> That's a reasonable suggestion. But I also have more time flexibility
> over easter then in my normal week. So if there is opportunity to
> restore service on the original server I'd be happy to do so. But
> definitely don't want to continue relying on infra where we can't have
> full control.

we do have full control, only takes more people to coordinate rather
than a lone wolf to hack away. Devuan is primarily a community

this thread will follow on devuan-dev. In particular, any FUD about
issues of integrity affecting our infrastructure won't be given space
on this list.