...
Info |
---|
Please be advised: DevExp Working Group meetings are recorded. |
Link: (posted after meeting) https://tcril-org.zoom.us/rec/share/Cpjc5H0-m5zCQvsmEciXcmgW4O4sW7GZxcfX-i1c1xrBRdVLvbfxMGfAHIZ03DAv.3OnQsJx_O1SXinLB
Participants
Meeting captain: Kyle McCormick
Notetaker: Rebecca Graber (Deactivated)
Discussion topics
Item | Notes |
---|
Demos | Kyle McCormick : removing github requirements and moving them to PyPI Working example: Blockstore. Pushed to PyPI with a GH action In repo: 181 files In PyPI zip: 60 files
In Olive edx-platform, we have a list of libraries in github.in where we install the entire repo (as of Olive, there are 9 of these) As of Olive, this includes the Blockstore Developers don’t always know the benefits of PyPI, and in the middle of an upgrade it’s probably a waste. github.in is meant for temporary things pip install requirements/edx/base.in on a container that already has everything installed (ie a noop): 55s, the VAST majority of the time being spent on Github cloning and running setup.py
In the latest edx-platform (ie master) only 3 GH libraries, two of which we expect to be removed shortly pip install requirements/edx/base.in on a container that already has everything installed (ie a noop): 36s!
We may be able to get down to 25s when we remove everything
Q&A [Becca] Q: Was the work mostly just copying over the GH action? A: In some cases, yes. For Codejail, setup.py was missing a few modules so had to track those down [Jeremy] Q: 1. Yay! Have we done investigation on wheels vs source distribution? A: Not yet, but there’s a ticket for it. [Jeremy] Note: At some point it may make a difference which PyPI mirror you’re using [Kyle] Also, pruning edx-platform requirements will be another major time save |
Cross Pollination | Your Name Your Item to Share Additional notes
Jeremy Becca Kyle
|
Challenges Each challenge should have a follow up action. If you have an idea for follow up actions, add it. Or if you aren’t sure, leave it blank. We’ll discuss all actions either way.
| Your Name Kyle Jeremy Formulating a concise mental model of our development environment First stab at this is at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XAipznjIcTaE2H454M74No2Ro_9VftbolfV4YVv-B9I/edit#gid=0 (mentioned earlier), suspect we’ll need some diagrams before we’re done On Arch BOM we’re going in and out of devstack mindset, hard to dedicate time to thinking through this Should there be a hard line between what the individual repo provides vs what the environment provides? this is changing with Tutor some Makefile targets are common across repos, some common-ish. Would be nice to have a common interface across all repos
Jeremy Smoothing learning curves Things like Kubernetes, docker-compose, Terraform, Ansible, etc. have a wide range of possible knowledge depth; find appropriate resources for each level
- Meeting captain: Transpose action items into the “Action Item” section below.
|
Successes | |
Suggested Action Items | 0-2 minutes: Last Time: - Note: ^ are now to be created as issues in the devstack repo
- Kyle McCormick Will write a TEP for local package workflow
- (been focused on static assets, haven’t had time to do this yet)
This Time: - Meeting captain: Move any remaining action item’s to next week’s minutes.
|
Look at the board | https://github.com/orgs/openedx/projects/37 |
...