|
|
Experimental Physics and
| ||||||||||||||||
|
|
Hi Lucas, All
FRIB is using our own internal CI/CD system for building and deploying Debian packages.
I'm not building and maintaining
EPICS software, but I do build and deploy a lot of other controls-related software, I'd like to share my point of view on your question:
1. Push to upstream means additional effort and probably quality of assurance is required;
2. Each lab/institute usually has site-specific requirements, software configurations, etc. which may still be effort-required to patch the upstream packages before using them;
3. Sometimes, it is more flexible to just maintain the homemade software.
Thanks,
Tong
From: Tech-talk <[email protected]> on behalf of Lucas Russo via Tech-talk <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 5:59:29 PM To: Abdalla Ahmad Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: EPICS deb/rpm packaging [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of FRIB
Hi Abdalla,
That's awesome. I'm more familiar with Debian, but ALS/ALS-U are RHEL based too. So, that could be interesting
for us, for sure.
I feel so much effort has been put to packaging EPICS (by many different people and labs, with exciting results)
that I wanted to better understand the "last" remaining step into pushing that upstream.
Now with NSLS-II transitioning to RHEL, I wonder which labs are still using this: https://github.com/epicsdeb
And also, I imagine the NSLS-II Debian repo (https://epicsdeb.bnl.gov/debian/) is gonna become
unsupported/unmaintained, but can anyone from NSLS-II vouch for that?
Is FRIB still using https://github.com/epicsdeb?
Thanks!
Lucas
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:55 PM Abdalla Ahmad <[email protected]> wrote:
| ||||||||||||||||
| ANJ, 19 Mar 2026 |
·
Home
·
News
·
About
·
Talk
·
Base
·
Modules
·
Extensions
·
· Distributions · Download · Documents · Links · Licensing · |