Visa denna sidaEditera denna sidaLås denna sidaLänkar till denna sidaBilagor till denna sidaHistorik för denna sidaSwikins toppSenaste ändringarSök i SwikinHjälpguide

Gjallar instance for Gjallar development

We wondered if it would be useful to create a Gjallar instance for managing Gjallar development. We think it would, because the process of creating the instance could organize the development of Gjallar, and helping communication among the developers.

  1. What would be the artifact we want to create? (an image?)
  2. What would be the goal of the instance?
  3. Where to host it?

Göran Krampe: gjallar.se (this box) is a Debian box that can host a Gjallar installation. I just haven't gotten around to it - but now that we do have a working(?) Linux port then we should to it ASAP IMHO.

Update: Göran Krampe: We have one instance up now but it has some issues - I need to configure Apache better for URLs (or get Squeak to skip "/seaside/Gjallar") and we need to figure out why the CSS loads take lots of time.

2006-12-20 Göran Krampe: Another idea is to host this at Toolkit which has hardware just sitting around. :) A third option is to rig something on hardware sitting in my attic doing nothing - but then we need to figure out how to deal with dynamic IPs.

2006-12-20 Herbert König: Remember I offered to hack in the issues from this wiki, if anyone cares for the history.

2006-12-21 Balázs Kósi: Cool! What's really interesting is: how we manage to load those issues in. Lots of questions will pop up! Some of the first ones: Do we start to build a new process from scratch? or from simple prototype? or we pick one of the sample processes (which one?) and start to transform it on demand?

2006-12-21 Herbert König: On the old ones I thought of using Simple and copy paste everything into notes. For new ones I first thought of creating a custom process. Now I think no single process fits everything and a complicated process will be a hindrance.
So I propose we start everything with the simple process and make up a new process if we encounter something that needs discussion, proposed fixes and a decision before being fixed.

2006-12-21 Göran Krampe: Why don't we do it like this (as soon as we get the technical issues fixed):

2006-12-21 Herbert: No objections here. Your proposal is simple enough to not be a hindrance. We can make up new ones as needed. I don't plan to make an exercise out of entering the old ones but will gladly step back if someone wants to :-))

2007-05-09 Keith: Mercurial generates ChangeSets which according to the Mercurial Tutorial can be emailed. Thus Gjallar could keep a record of changesets for generating a software project's repositories. This would be part of a 'software development' process toolkit/component/whatever.

2007-05-09 Keith: I Now have a linux-box sitting there not doing much. This could be a temporary gjallar-dev instance.

2007-05-09 Göran: We actually now have a Hetzner box with plenty of RAM and disk and I have already set up a Gjallar on it (though currently turned off). So that base is covered. But I don't want to spend too much time messing with this during the next 6 weeks. :) But I can be persuaded to do it if we all think it is beneficial - after all, it would help us find bugs etc since we would be running it ourselves.