noosfero | Document process for changing dependencies (#756)

[Rodrigo Souto]

New comment for Merge Request 756

https://gitlab.com/noosfero/noosfero/merge_requests/756#note_3128657


Rodrigo Souto

If we all agree that noosfero community should provide basic production deployment infra, then we must go to the next point: what are the "official" deployment infra and who maintains them?

Currently the only "official" deployment infras I can see are debian (stable) packages and rubygems installation (not talking the chef-or-capistrano-or-anything-like-that layer). Therefore, any Noosfero release should not break neither these infras. Note that both these infras are *NOT* negotiable in a short/middle-term since they are deployed on serveral production servers.

IMO, the whole community should maintain both infras (and any other that we start to consider "official") and for so the most reasonable solution is to have CI of both deployment methods (if I'm not mistaken @terceiro is already working on something like that for debian stable deployment). But the reality is that we don't have this yet. So unless we force everyone to simulate both deployment methods after every commit made, we need to rely on someone/some group to ensure these deployments are working properly (specially when they also mess with our development environment setup). Today, as I see through commit messages and discussions, these guys are @terceiro and @brauliobo, that proactively review and test these deployments on debian and rubygems deployment respectively. I think they should continue to do this work which is extremelly helpful and it would be even better if there were other people interested on doing it too.

I agree with @brauliobo that these roles and policy should be made explicit but I think they are still needed.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.softwarelivre.org/pipermail/noosfero-dev/attachments/20160106/8c03c0f2/attachment.html>