are there any volunteers willing to help make these python packages available upstream?
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 5:34 AM Ernesto Puerta <epuer...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hey Ken, > > This change doesn't not involve any further internet access other than the > already required for the "make dist" stage (e.g.: npm packages). That said, > where feasible, I also prefer to keep the current approach for a minor > version. > > Kind Regards, > Ernesto > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 9:06 PM Ken Dreyer <kdre...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> I hope we don't backport such a big change to Quincy. That will have a >> large impact on how we build in restricted environments with no >> internet access. >> >> We could get the missing packages into EPEL. >> >> - Ken >> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 7:32 AM Ernesto Puerta <epuer...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Casey, >> > >> > The original idea was to leave this to Reef alone, but given that the >> > CentOS 9 Quincy release is also blocked by missing Python packages, I >> > think that it'd make sense to backport it. >> > >> > I'm coordinating with Pere (in CC) to expedite this. We may need help to >> > troubleshoot Shaman/rpmbuild issues. Who would be the best one to help >> > with that? >> > >> > Regarding your last question, I don't know who's the maintainer of those >> > packages in EPEL. There's this BZ (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2166620) >> > requesting that specific package, but that's only one out of the dozen of >> > missing packages (plus transitive dependencies)... >> > >> > Kind Regards, >> > Ernesto >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 2:19 PM Casey Bodley <cbod...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> hi Ernesto and lists, >> >> >> >> > [1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/47501 >> >> >> >> are we planning to backport this to quincy so we can support centos 9 >> >> there? enabling that upgrade path on centos 9 was one of the >> >> conditions for dropping centos 8 support in reef, which i'm still keen >> >> to do >> >> >> >> if not, can we find another resolution to >> >> https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58832? as i understand it, all of >> >> those python packages exist in centos 8. do we know why they were >> >> dropped for centos 9? have we looked into making those available in >> >> epel? (cc Ken and Kaleb) >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 12:01 PM Ernesto Puerta <epuer...@redhat.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Kevin, >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Isn't this one of the reasons containers were pushed, so that the >> >> >> packaging isn't as big a deal? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Yes, but the Ceph community has a strong commitment to provide distro >> >> > packages for those users who are not interested in moving to containers. >> >> > >> >> >> Is it the continued push to support lots of distros without using >> >> >> containers that is the problem? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > If not a problem, it definitely makes it more challenging. Compiled >> >> > components often sort this out by statically linking deps whose >> >> > packages are not widely available in distros. The approach we're >> >> > proposing here would be the closest equivalent to static linking for >> >> > interpreted code (bundling). >> >> > >> >> > Thanks for sharing your questions! >> >> > >> >> > Kind regards, >> >> > Ernesto >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Dev mailing list -- d...@ceph.io >> >> > To unsubscribe send an email to dev-le...@ceph.io >> >> >> _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
