New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow publishing local repositories directly #10

Closed
msiebuhr opened this Issue Mar 14, 2014 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@msiebuhr
Copy link

msiebuhr commented Mar 14, 2014

E.g. adding aptly publish repo -distribution=foo <some-repo-name>

Taking snapshots of development/testing repositories is tedious and accumulates a lot of junk.

(One could even default the distribution name to the repository name.)

@smira smira added this to the v0.5 milestone Mar 14, 2014

@smira smira added the enhancement label Mar 14, 2014

@msiebuhr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

msiebuhr commented Mar 14, 2014

I've been thinking about this a bit, and it might not be that trivial to do easily. Mainly because aptly right now seem to be 'pull'-based; you change a mirror/repos, pull the change into a snapshot, and pull that into the published repositories.

If changes to local repositories should be published immediately, it would require that any mirror/repos pushes it's changes to the code that manages the published repositories.

@smira

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

smira commented Mar 14, 2014

I was thinking about that as well, there could be several issues:

  • if gpg signing is enabled, it might require re-signing Release file each time (and entering passphrase for the key)
    • probably I don't want to update each time I do some change, I might have more changes to come

So I was thinking about something like aptly publish sync that would update all published repos that are stale (have changed since last publishing). So you can do aptly repo add .... && aptly publish sync if you want your changes to be published immediately.

@smira smira modified the milestone: v0.5 Mar 14, 2014

@msiebuhr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

msiebuhr commented Mar 14, 2014

I wasn't proposing to actually do it that way, per se. More some thoughts on why it might change some fundamental things in aptly.

I hadn't thought about the signing, though.

@LHCGreg

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

LHCGreg commented Mar 16, 2014

I am interested in this as well. I am looking into using aptly to host packages of my own software. It looks like what I have to do currently to add a new version of a package is

aptly repo add my_repo my_package_2.0.1.deb
aptly publish drop wheezy
aptly snapshot drop my_snapshot
aptly db cleanup
aptly snapshot create my_snapshot from repo my_repo
aptly publish snapshot -distribution="wheezy" my_snapshot

It would be nice for that to be a one or two step process that does not take down the published repository.

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 19, 2014

First round of support for localRepos as source for publishing. Also …
…more intelligent algo to get publishing defaults. #10 #12

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 25, 2014

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2014

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2014

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2014

smira added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2014

@smira

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

smira commented Mar 26, 2014

Local repository publishing is supported in master.

@smira smira closed this Mar 26, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment