Re: [PATCH v11 0/9] rutabaga_gfx + gfxstream

From: Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org>
To: Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com,
	 akihiko.odaki@gmail.com, ray.huang@amd.com,
	alex.bennee@linaro.org,  shentey@gmail.com, ernunes@redhat.com,
	manos.pitsidianakis@linaro.org,  philmd@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 0/9] rutabaga_gfx + gfxstream
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 12:05:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAfnVBmxE4ThprAFuEj2khoX9LqxuVe02K7B-ps4g0r77vqmyg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871qfriok0.fsf@alyssa.is>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2226 bytes --]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:11 AM Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is> wrote:

> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 4:07 AM Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is> wrote:
> >
> >> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> writes:
> >>
> >> > - Official "release commits" issued for rutabaga_gfx_ffi,
> >> >   gfxstream, aemu-base.  For example, see crrev.com/c/4778941
> >> >
> >> > - The release commits can make packaging easier, though once
> >> >   again all known users will likely just build from sources
> >> >   anyways
> >>
> >> It's a small thing, but could there be actual tags, rather than just
> >> blessed commits?  It'd just make them easier to find, and save a bit of
> >> time in review for packages.
> >>
> >
> > I added:
> >
> >
> https://crosvm.dev/book/appendix/rutabaga_gfx.html#latest-releases-for-potential-packaging
> >
> > Tags are possible, but I want to clarify the use case before packaging.
> > Where are you thinking of packaging it for (Debian??)? Are you mostly
> > interested in Wayland passthrough (my guess) or gfxstream too?  Depending
> > your use case, we may be able to minimize the work involved.
>
> Packaging for Nixpkgs (where I already maintain what to my knowledge is
> the only crosvm distro package).  I'm personally mostly interested in
> Wayland passthroug, but I wouldn't be surprised if others are interested
> in gfxstream.  The packaging work is already done, I've just been
> holding off actually pushing the packages waiting for the stable
> releases.
>
> The reason that tags would be useful is that it allows a reviewer of the
> package to see at a glance that the package is built from a stable
> release.  If it's just built from a commit hash, they have to go and
> verify that it's a stable release, which is mildly annoying and
> unconventional.
>

Understood.  Request to have gfxstream and AEMU v0.1.2 release tags made.

For rutabaga_gfx_ffi, is the crates.io upload sufficient?

https://crates.io/crates/rutabaga_gfx_ffi

Debian, for example, treats crates.io as the source of truth and builds
tooling around that.  I wonder if Nixpkgs as similar tooling around
crates.io.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3440 bytes --]