refactor pkg_deb

[aiuto]

Refactor debian building so it can be more easily owned by others.

blocked by #443

cc: @alexeagle

[aiuto]

This is ready again, now that the big reorganization PR is merged.

[nacl]

We don't happen to have tests that exercise the distro tarball, would we? A simple way to do this would be something that would build the distro, extract it somewhere, plant the tests inside the extracted location, and then run the tests.

[nacl]

I think we need to confirm the policy on CODEOWNERs first so we prevent shooting ourselves in the foot.

LGTM otherwise, will approve once we come to a consensus on it and naming.

[aiuto]

We don't happen to have tests that exercise the distro tarball, would we? A simple way to do this would be something that would build the distro, extract it somewhere, plant the tests inside the extracted location, and then run the tests.

Yes. The tests under distro do do that. They make sure we can build some things when using the tarball, and under a different repository name.
We could probably add finer grained test in the future.

[aiuto]

I think we need to confirm the policy on CODEOWNERs first so we prevent shooting ourselves in the foot.

What particular foot shooting are you thinking of?
The current situation is that you and I are the only codeowners, and with the current branch protection policy, that means a PR from either of us is blocked on the other.

Adding extra owners will allow a domain expert to review and approve a change. If it is strictly to RPM or DEB packaging (or maybe even tar & zip) I welcome the ability to have someone else be on the hook to review things.
That's what this will do.

[nacl]

What particular foot shooting are you thinking of? The current situation is that you and I are the only codeowners, and with the current branch protection policy, that means a PR from either of us is blocked on the other.

Adding extra owners will allow a domain expert to review and approve a change. If it is strictly to RPM or DEB packaging (or maybe even tar & zip) I welcome the ability to have someone else be on the hook to review things. That's what this will do.

I was mostly concerned regarding exclusivity to owners -- that if I were the only owner of the RPM code and I were unavailable, then a change couldn't be approved without editing the CODEOWNERs files.

Reading more closely, I see that this is more of an overlay and not really a problem. Will approve momentarily.

[nacl]

My concerns are addressed in comments and code updates. LGTM.