Subject: Re: [PATCH builds.sr.ht 1/3] Use short version based on
 $openbsd_version instead of hardcoding set filenames
To: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>, ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-dev@lists.sr.ht
References: <161392188026.13895.17993000693180821485-0@git.sr.ht>
 <161392188026.13895.17993000693180821485-1@git.sr.ht>
 <C9G426NMLMO3.32HXGJ9VNIC9Q@taiga>
 <553784bd-8b8f-4fe6-b9ae-dcd7d07cfbfa@iki.fi>
 <C9G4CMHPRQCG.9V48STDY4MOJ@taiga>
From: Jarkko Oranen <oranenj@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <e8373a4c-b361-5b3f-48cb-7581ddcbebbf@iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:22:06 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C9G4CMHPRQCG.9V48STDY4MOJ@taiga>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2/22/21 4:11 PM, Drew DeVault wrote:
> I'd rather not add releases which are not well-supported for downstream
> use by the upstream distributor - in this case, it doesn't seem like
> OpenBSD current is very conducive to downstream use. Am I wrong? FreeBSD
> current causes us a lot of headaches.

With OpenBSD, using -current is actually reasonably supported as long as 
you use snapshots. Building your own is actively discouraged. I'll 
expect there will be occasional breakage and the image will fail to 
build for whatever reason, but I imagine it will still be useful in 
allowing projects to test against an upcoming OpenBSD release, 
especially given that they often make quite drastic changes.

If you set up automation to rebuild -current images, say, once a week, 
it's probably best to make it so that it ignores one failure and just 
tries again the next day (or week) with a new snapshot.

If it turns out to be too big a headache or not in demand, I suppose we 
can always just stop supporting it. :/

--
Jarkko