Once upon a time, Carl George <[email protected]> said: > There is a high level overview of EPEL 10 branches in the documentation. > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/branches/#_epel_10 > > If you prefer video to written documentation, check out this > presentation I gave at CentOS Connect earlier this year. > > https://youtu.be/3pbjS-tD4q8 > > For a longer background, see this discussion thread of the initial > EPEL 10 proposal. > > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/epel-10-proposal/44304 > > epel10.0 branches were created automatically for all packages with an > existing epel10 branch during a mass branching event that took place > back in February. > > https://pagure.io/epel/issue/304 > > If you have a package that didn't have an epel10 branch before the > mass branching, you can manually request an epel10.0 branch with > fedpkg request-branch, just like you would request an f42 branch for a > new package that only has a rawhide branch and missed the f42 mass > branching. We've intentionally set up EPEL 10 to have similarities to > both RHEL and Fedora branching so that it is a more intuitive > experience for maintainers. That said, it's still a change from how > EPEL has traditionally worked, so I hope the references I've provided > here help the transition make more sense for you.
I think it's weird that requesting a branch for epel10 lands in epel10.1 right now, rather than the current RHEL release of 10.0. This means that I requested a bunch of packages to be branched for epel10 and none of them are available on a released version. I guess I can go reopen the BZes to ask for maintainers to also create epel10.0 branches (that feels a bit extra). IMHO epel10 should be the current release, with some other branch representing the "rawhide" equivalent (I'd say epel10next but don't want to confuse with ELN). At a minimum, the "request a package for EPEL" should be updated to specify that you need to ask for at least two branches, epel10 and epel10.<current>. Also, one of the suggested work-arounds for this was: # dnf --releasever 10.1 install foo But that doesn't work because that sets it globally and breaks the RHEL repos. And if you just enable the EPEL repos, you can't install something that has a dependency on a RHEL package. So I don't see any good way to install a new epel10 build other than edit the EPEL yum repo files to replace $releasever_minor with a hard-coded value (and then remember to undo it later). -- Chris Adams <[email protected]> -- _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
