Re: Improving the way we build nightly apps

[Tristan Van Berkom <tristan vanberkom codethink co uk>]

On Wed, 2017-03-01 at 18:13 +0000, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 AM Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro gnome or
> g> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 15:50 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
> > > You make it sound like there is already unanimous support for
> > this 
> > > (considering I've seen no discussion on the topic, I find that
> > hard
> > > to 
> > > take at face value)?
> >
> >
> > release team is dealing with right now. Currently, we only maintain
> > the
> > JHBuild modulesets, and that's not great because it's not what
> > users
> > actually use.
>
> Users aren't using Jhbuild?  What are they using?  I'm asking because
> in our newcomer documentation we are asking them to use JHBuild.  So
> I'm trying to understand why there is a dichotomy.

I think what Michael is saying (correct me if I'm wrong) is that
developers (newcomers or otherwise) are using JHBuild. Users in general
use what distro packagers put together, which was not assembled with
JHBuild. Users are also going to be using Flatpaks as it becomes
available in the next/current wave of distro.

The JHBuild modulesets, besides being handy to actually build stuff, is
also the GNOME release team's method of blessing what vector of
specific package versions that are appropriate to assemble as a whole,
and I would not be surprised that distros use this metadata at least as
a guideline to build and distribute GNOME.

Cheers,
    -Tristan