From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B87A46970E for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 21:00:56 +0300 (MSK) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 21:01:05 +0300 From: Alexander Turenko Message-ID: <20200131180105.je2cf4xz5fpt5dtl@tkn_work_nb> References: <3840321b3c8368d4da86951c0a3e3bcfb3ded063.1580450098.git.avtikhon@tarantool.org> <20200131082639.GD10740@atlas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200131082639.GD10740@atlas> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v8] gitlab-ci: implement packing into MCS S3 List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Konstantin Osipov Cc: Oleg Piskunov , tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:26:39AM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote: > * Alexander V. Tikhonov [20/01/31 10:43]: > > I understand it's a v8 and I am jumping on this late, but I'm > really curious why: > > - you use shell in 2020. > - you create a bunch of essentially proprietary scripts (noone is > going to look at this) instead of making it a feature of packpack. > > Many people need to create repositories, and many people use > packpack already. It's best if this is just added there. Sure, a standalone tool like [1] would be better. Here I totally agree. I would try to reuse mkrepo (my points are in [2]). But several my co-workers think that the script is more maintainable, so I didn't blocked this way. [1]: https://github.com/packpack/packpack/blob/34180facf8a9f0c793b09220e2cfd2d68e1faf59/tools/packagecloud [2]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/3380#issuecomment-527497014 WBR, Alexander Turenko.