On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 12:36 -0500, Greg Swift wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:29:26 +0200 > > Fabrice Salvaire <f.salva...@genomicvision.com> wrote: > > > >> Dear all, > >> > >> I upgraded the Zabbix package to the upstream version 2.0.2. It seems > >> to work fine, except I don't tested everything. > >> > >> Thus I have the SRPM with the update for the spec file and some of > >> the sources files. How can I provide it to EPEL ? > > > > File a bug against the epel Zabbix package and the maintainer can > > review and apply your patches. > > its actually a touch more complex to that unless things have changed. > The EPEL guidelines [1] state that major version updates are to be > avoided with a goal of 'yum update' just working.
I recently joined Dan Horak (sharkcz) in the work towards a 2.0 package for Fedora and EPEL. It's pretty complex indeed. We're switching to two users to keep agent and proxy/server isolated better. We also switched to Debian Alternatives to choose between database implementations and have no conflicting sub-packages. The draft is suitable for systemd and init scripts -- having all necessary conditionals in place and hopefully ending the existence of 4 different branches. I published a draft. I hope Dan can take a look at it soon. Anybody's comment is highly appreciated. http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix20-2.0.2-3.el6.src.rpm http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix.Fedora is a README, that will become part of the package. > I'm not sure how > big of a difference 1.8 -> 2.0, but 1.6 -> 1.8 was different enough. > Currently EPEL5 has 1.6 release of zabbix and EPEL6 has 1.8 release. > This has been talked about several times on list and I don't know that > anyone came up with a good resolution. You definitely need to run a database upgrade. Since proxies and servers must run the same major version, it'd be a good idea to also have it in EPEL 5. > > One of the options was to change the package name and host both > releases in EPEL. I'm not sure how often this actually happens, or > what the path to get there would be. That's the approach we took. zabbix20 conflicts with zabbix. Zabbix has a good stable-policy, so relevant changes would only appear on major x.y releases. They're aiming for regular major releases every 9 months from now on. Volker Fröhlich > > I asked about this with 1.8 on rhel5 and got the above response, so I > thought I'd share. That being said, take this as info not a reason to > stop :) I'm all for someone figuring out a way forward. > > -greg > > [1] > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_major_version_update > > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel-list mailing list > epel-devel-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
