Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Dennis Gregorovic]

The team was able to get koji 1.17 released today. :)  So, while the YUM
deprecation got moved out to F31, you may want to pull 1.17 into F30.

Cheers
-- Dennis

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 3:18 PM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:25 AM Michal Domonkos 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 2:24 AM Dennis Gregorovic 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop
>> the yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for
>> image building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only
>> medium confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel
>> freeze on Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its
>> final testing.  If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is
>> the backup plan?
>>
>> I suppose you're concerned about the Python 3 support part and not
>> about the DNF port, but in case it's the latter -- please note the YUM
>> deprecation has been approved for F31 (and is already happening in
>> Rawhide now) as opposed to F30, to give everyone a bit more time to
>> finish their porting efforts.
>>
>
> Ah, I didn't know that!  In that case, we'll still try to land koji 1.17
> for F30 if we can, but we'll make sure that it's had sufficient testing and
> not rush it out prematurely.
>
> Also, I forgot to include koji-devel@ on the previous emails.  Looping in
> that list now.
>


-- 
Dennis Gregorovic
Manager, PnT DevOps
Red Hat
dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Dennis Gregorovic]

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:25 AM Michal Domonkos  wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 2:24 AM Dennis Gregorovic 
> wrote:
> >
> > I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop
> the yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for
> image building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only
> medium confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel
> freeze on Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its
> final testing.  If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is
> the backup plan?
>
> I suppose you're concerned about the Python 3 support part and not
> about the DNF port, but in case it's the latter -- please note the YUM
> deprecation has been approved for F31 (and is already happening in
> Rawhide now) as opposed to F30, to give everyone a bit more time to
> finish their porting efforts.
>

Ah, I didn't know that!  In that case, we'll still try to land koji 1.17
for F30 if we can, but we'll make sure that it's had sufficient testing and
not rush it out prematurely.

Also, I forgot to include koji-devel@ on the previous emails.  Looping in
that list now.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Michal Domonkos]

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 2:24 AM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:
>
> I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the 
> yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image 
> building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium 
> confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on 
> Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final testing.  
> If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the backup plan?

I suppose you're concerned about the Python 3 support part and not
about the DNF port, but in case it's the latter -- please note the YUM
deprecation has been approved for F31 (and is already happening in
Rawhide now) as opposed to F30, to give everyone a bit more time to
finish their porting efforts.

-- 
Michal Domonkos
Software Engineer, Packaging Tools in Fedora/RHEL
Red Hat, Inc.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Peter Robinson]

> > I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the 
> > yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image 
> > building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium 
> > confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on 
> > Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final 
> > testing.  If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the 
> > backup plan?
> >
>
> I'm not sure. Honestly, I'd rather take a snapshot of git master
> that's going to be Koji 1.17 in Python 3 form for F30+ so that we can
> iterate and get to the final release.

Who is the royal "we" in this context? In the lead up to release both
infra and rel-eng are extremely busy and generally the last thing
needed is more things to do and more problems to debug.

> None of the Koji components are shipped on any of the media, it's only
> accessed through the repositories, so there's a very low risk there.

I'm more concerned about the stability of the server side components
and the extra stress put on them and the team that supports them 24*7

> Moreover, releng redeploys post-GA for prod, so that gives us a long
> window to suss out issues. We could even have staging upgraded early
> to "kick the tires" if need be.

I think upgrading staging early is a fantastic idea.

> The worst thing that could happen if 1.17.0 goes out and there's a
> problem is that 1.17.1 has to be issued. In the grand scheme of
> things, that's really not that bad.

The problem is having the developers available to deal with the issues
to make 1.17.1 with the required fixes
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Peter Robinson]

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 1:23 AM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:
>
> I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the 
> yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image 
> building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium 
> confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on 
> Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final testing.  
> If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the backup plan?

The oz 0.17 snapshot that landed yesterday has a bunch of work to
support python3 but I've no idea what the state of imagefactory is.

> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:33 PM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:
>>
>> I chatted with the Koji team and they are planning on having the yum 
>> dependency removed in the upcoming 1.17 release and getting that release 
>> finished before F30 code freeze.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 3:35 PM Michal Domonkos  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
>>> >
>>> > == Summary ==
>>> > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
>>>
>>> Just a heads-up that I have updated the proposal so that it does
>>> *not*[2] include python2-urlgrabber, given how much it is still used
>>> within our infra.
>>>
>>> This should make it easier to consider the whole change proposal
>>> self-contained and thus more realistic towards Fedora 30.  However,
>>> note that we still need that koji DNF port merged.
>>>
>>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Detailed_Description
>>> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Dependencies
>>> --
>>> Michal Domonkos
>>> Software Engineer, Software Mgmt Subsystem
>>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>> ___
>>> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
>>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>> List Archives: 
>>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dennis Gregorovic
>> Manager, PnT DevOps
>> Red Hat
>> dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
>
>
>
> --
> Dennis Gregorovic
> Manager, PnT DevOps
> Red Hat
> dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 8:23 PM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:
>
> I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the 
> yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image 
> building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium 
> confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on 
> Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final testing.  
> If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the backup plan?
>

I'm not sure. Honestly, I'd rather take a snapshot of git master
that's going to be Koji 1.17 in Python 3 form for F30+ so that we can
iterate and get to the final release.

None of the Koji components are shipped on any of the media, it's only
accessed through the repositories, so there's a very low risk there.

Moreover, releng redeploys post-GA for prod, so that gives us a long
window to suss out issues. We could even have staging upgraded early
to "kick the tires" if need be.

The worst thing that could happen if 1.17.0 goes out and there's a
problem is that 1.17.1 has to be issued. In the grand scheme of
things, that's really not that bad.






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 8:23 PM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:
>
> I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the 
> yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image 
> building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium 
> confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on 
> Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final testing.  
> If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the backup plan?
>

I'm not sure. Honestly, I'd rather take a snapshot of git master
that's going to be Koji 1.17 in Python 3 form for F30+ so that we can
iterate and get to the final release.

None of the Koji components are shipped on any of the media, it's only
accessed through the repositories, so there's a very low risk there.

Moreover, releng redeploys post-GA for prod, so that gives us a long
window to suss out issues. We could even have staging upgraded early
to "kick the tires" if need be.

The worst thing that could happen if 1.17.0 goes out and there's a
problem is that 1.17.1 has to be issued. In the grand scheme of
things, that's really not that bad.






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Dennis Gregorovic]

I have an update on the koji end.  The 1.17 release will not only drop the
yum dependency, it will also have full python 3 support (except for image
building that uses oz / imagefactory).  Unfortunately, there is only medium
confidence that the 1.17 release will be ready by the F30 devel freeze on
Tuesday.  It depends on whether QE uncovers any issues in its final
testing.  If we're not able to land the release on Tuesday, what is the
backup plan?

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:33 PM Dennis Gregorovic  wrote:

> I chatted with the Koji team and they are planning on having the yum
> dependency removed in the upcoming 1.17 release and getting that release
> finished before F30 code freeze.
>
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 3:35 PM Michal Domonkos 
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
>> >
>> > == Summary ==
>> > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
>>
>> Just a heads-up that I have updated the proposal so that it does
>> *not*[2] include python2-urlgrabber, given how much it is still used
>> within our infra.
>>
>> This should make it easier to consider the whole change proposal
>> self-contained and thus more realistic towards Fedora 30.  However,
>> note that we still need that koji DNF port merged.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Detailed_Description
>> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Dependencies
>> --
>> Michal Domonkos
>> Software Engineer, Software Mgmt Subsystem
>> Red Hat, Inc.
>> ___
>> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives:
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
>
>
> --
> Dennis Gregorovic
> Manager, PnT DevOps
> Red Hat
> dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
>


-- 
Dennis Gregorovic
Manager, PnT DevOps
Red Hat
dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Sérgio Basto]

On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 06:22 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-02-01 at 11:23 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > RepoView just needs a patch to switch from rpmUtils and yum.comps
> > to
> > rpm and libcomps Python bindings, which I think I already wrote and
> > put somewhere. I'll have to dig it out.

Sorry my last email had lots of typo .

I need a tool to read repos and compare it .
I imported yours repoview repo [1] into gitub [2] , I don't use / know
mercurial 
Neal Gompa have use a user in github to update the authors in github
[3]

And other subject is "tracker bug for Fedora to switch over to dnf from
yum " [4] we still have a lot of packages dependent on yum .

Best regards,

[1] 
https://bitbucket.org/Conan_Kudo/repoview 

[2]
https://github.com/sergiomb2/repoview

[3]
https://github.com/sergiomb2/repoview/import/authors

[4]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1156491

> I need a tool to read repos and compare it , meanwhile I found one
> bug  tracker bug for Fedora to switch over to dnf from yum and yum-
> utils [1] 
> 
> If you could find this code would be great , I checking your repo
> meanwhile . 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> [1]
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1156491
> 
> -- 
> Sérgio M. B.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Sérgio Basto]

On Fri, 2019-02-01 at 11:23 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> RepoView just needs a patch to switch from rpmUtils and yum.comps to
> rpm and libcomps Python bindings, which I think I already wrote and
> put somewhere. I'll have to dig it out.

I need a tool to read repos and compare it , meanwhile I found one
bug  tracker bug for Fedora to switch over to dnf from yum and yum-
utils [1] 

If you could find this code would be great , I checking your repo
meanwhile . 

Thanks.

[1]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1156491

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:07 AM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On 2/5/19 1:37 PM, Randy Barlow wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 09:56 -0600, Mátyás Selmeci wrote:
> >> What's the replacement?
> >
> > Bodhi switched from mash to pungi, and I think Bodhi might have been
> > the last thing using mash.
>
> The last thing _we_ use mash for. ;)
>
> There may be other users out there somewhere, as it's a pretty nice
> little program to collect rpms into repos. Of course if there are, they
> should really try and help it's upstream move to python3, etc...
>

And as of this morning, Koji can be built from Git master without a
YUM v3 dependency and to use Python 3. :)

As for Mash, I had some WIP work on it a while ago, but I got
discouraged from finishing it...



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 2/5/19 1:37 PM, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 09:56 -0600, Mátyás Selmeci wrote:
>> What's the replacement?
> 
> Bodhi switched from mash to pungi, and I think Bodhi might have been
> the last thing using mash.

The last thing _we_ use mash for. ;)

There may be other users out there somewhere, as it's a pretty nice
little program to collect rpms into repos. Of course if there are, they
should really try and help it's upstream move to python3, etc...

kevin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:34 PM Mátyás Selmeci  wrote:
>
> On 2/1/19 10:23 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 10:23 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
> >>
> >> koji-builder, mash and repoview are ready to work without yum ?
> >>
> >
> > There's a pending PR for fixing koji-builder:
> > https://pagure.io/koji/pull-request/1117
> >
> > Mash is dead and not used in infra anymore, so it doesn't matter.
> >
>
> What's the replacement?
>

Some of the functionality is now part of Koji itself with its
dist-repos feature. For Fedora release engineering, the pungi tool
incorporates what's needed from mash.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Randy Barlow]

On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 09:56 -0600, Mátyás Selmeci wrote:
> What's the replacement?

Bodhi switched from mash to pungi, and I think Bodhi might have been
the last thing using mash.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 1:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen  wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 12:14, Mátyás Selmeci  wrote:
> >
> > On 1/31/19 1:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On 1/30/19 1:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >
> > >> Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
> > >> somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
> > >> breaks?
> > >
> > > Well, we could block yum in koji and remove it from all builders and see
> > > what happens, but I think it will break all epel builds (unless we
> > > switch epel to use dnf for buildroot population too) at least.
> > >
> > > kevin
> >
> > Can we put DNF in EPEL so people still targeting EL 7 can adapt their
> > scripts?
> >
>
> Dnf was added to RHEL-7 in the latest release as a tech preview and is
> in CentOS extras. As such later versions can not be put in EPEL
> without major packaging work.

The dnf in  RHEL 7 is not compatible with mock. I tried it.

> > As a side note, this is a problem with Python 3, too; I can't get any
> > Python 3 bindings for the yum/rpm libs on EL 7, which makes it hard to
> > port software that uses them.
> >
>
> There will be work on making a newer Python36 in EPEL in the next
> couple of months.
>
> > -Mat

The python34 also does not work with building packages in mock.

It's a lot of work doing this kind of backport. Something needs to be
done if RHEL 30 packages, which will be python3 by default, will be
backported to RHEL 7 or CentOS 7. INerting the "with_ython3" option
currently used to be "with_python2" and "with_python2" might do it,
I've tried things like this with the "py2pack" tool. But my patches to
it are being ignored upstream.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Mátyás Selmeci]

On 2/4/19 11:27 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 12:14, Mátyás Selmeci  wrote:
>>
>> On 1/31/19 1:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> On 1/30/19 1:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>>
 Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
 somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
 breaks?
>>>
>>> Well, we could block yum in koji and remove it from all builders and see
>>> what happens, but I think it will break all epel builds (unless we
>>> switch epel to use dnf for buildroot population too) at least.
>>>
>>> kevin
>>
>> Can we put DNF in EPEL so people still targeting EL 7 can adapt their
>> scripts?
>>
> 
> Dnf was added to RHEL-7 in the latest release as a tech preview and is
> in CentOS extras. As such later versions can not be put in EPEL
> without major packaging work.
>

Sounds good, I'll check it out from there.

>> As a side note, this is a problem with Python 3, too; I can't get any
>> Python 3 bindings for the yum/rpm libs on EL 7, which makes it hard to
>> port software that uses them.
>>
> 
> There will be work on making a newer Python36 in EPEL in the next
> couple of months.
> 

I didn't know new packages would be added as part of that, I thought
it was a rebuild / update of existing packages.  Thanks, that would be
useful.

-Mat
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 07:08:14PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 31. 01. 19 16:32, Michal Domonkos wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:46 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> >>Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:
> >>
> >>   - we change this to a system wide change
> >>   - we move it to Fedora 31
> >>   - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched 
> >> regardless of
> >>the dependent packages
> >>   - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not 
> >> fixed
> >>by beta freeze
> >>
> >>Contingency mechanism:
> >>
> >>   - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to ship
> >>Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo maintained by 
> >>the
> >>person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum (or other packages 
> >>retired)
> >>
> >>   - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in the
> >>actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team responsible 
> >>for the
> >>tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they need them and retires 
> >>them
> >>once that is no longer true
> >
> >+1
> >
> >As an alternative solution, based on a discussion with Neal Gompa
> >today on IRC, I propose the following:
> >
> >   - we remove python-urlgrabber from the original change proposal
> >(i.e. keeping it in F30)
> >   - we proceed with the retirement of the rest of the YUM stack in F30
> >   - we make sure the kojid PR[1] is merged in time for F30
> >
> >This is based on the following two facts:
> >
> >   - python-urlgrabber seems to be the last component of the YUM stack
> >that turns this proposal into a "system-wide" change, due to a number
> >of infra bits that require it (sigul, koji-containerbuild, osc or
> >imagefactory).   Therefore, if we just postpone the removal of
> >python-urlgrabber to F31 and merge that kojid PR, we could perhaps
> >agree on re-qualifying the change as "self-contained" (plus, there's
> >also the possibility of porting[2] python-urlgrabber to Python 3, but
> >that's for a separate discussion)
> >   - the kojid PR[1] is also in-line with another F30 change[3], so
> >there should be enough incentive to have it merged
> >
> >Before I go ahead and edit the proposal: Does this variant make sense to you?
> 
> It does to me. But well, I've been called a Python 2 deletionist
> before, so not sure if I'm not biased :)

FWIW, I like this "alternative proposal" better too.

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 12:14, Mátyás Selmeci  wrote:
>
> On 1/31/19 1:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On 1/30/19 1:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> >> Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
> >> somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
> >> breaks?
> >
> > Well, we could block yum in koji and remove it from all builders and see
> > what happens, but I think it will break all epel builds (unless we
> > switch epel to use dnf for buildroot population too) at least.
> >
> > kevin
>
> Can we put DNF in EPEL so people still targeting EL 7 can adapt their
> scripts?
>

Dnf was added to RHEL-7 in the latest release as a tech preview and is
in CentOS extras. As such later versions can not be put in EPEL
without major packaging work.

> As a side note, this is a problem with Python 3, too; I can't get any
> Python 3 bindings for the yum/rpm libs on EL 7, which makes it hard to
> port software that uses them.
>

There will be work on making a newer Python36 in EPEL in the next
couple of months.

> -Mat
>
> --
> Mátyás (Mat) Selmeci
> Open Science Grid Software Team / Center for High-Throughput Computing
> University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Mátyás Selmeci]

On 1/31/19 1:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 1/30/19 1:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
>> Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
>> somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
>> breaks?
> 
> Well, we could block yum in koji and remove it from all builders and see
> what happens, but I think it will break all epel builds (unless we
> switch epel to use dnf for buildroot population too) at least.
> 
> kevin

Can we put DNF in EPEL so people still targeting EL 7 can adapt their
scripts?

As a side note, this is a problem with Python 3, too; I can't get any
Python 3 bindings for the yum/rpm libs on EL 7, which makes it hard to
port software that uses them.

-Mat

-- 
Mátyás (Mat) Selmeci
Open Science Grid Software Team / Center for High-Throughput Computing
University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Mátyás Selmeci]

On 2/1/19 10:23 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 10:23 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>>
>> koji-builder, mash and repoview are ready to work without yum ?
>>
> 
> There's a pending PR for fixing koji-builder:
> https://pagure.io/koji/pull-request/1117
> 
> Mash is dead and not used in infra anymore, so it doesn't matter.
>

What's the replacement?


-- 
Mátyás (Mat) Selmeci
Open Science Grid Software Team / Center for High-Throughput Computing
University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Dennis Gregorovic]

I chatted with the Koji team and they are planning on having the yum
dependency removed in the upcoming 1.17 release and getting that release
finished before F30 code freeze.

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 3:35 PM Michal Domonkos  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
>
> Just a heads-up that I have updated the proposal so that it does
> *not*[2] include python2-urlgrabber, given how much it is still used
> within our infra.
>
> This should make it easier to consider the whole change proposal
> self-contained and thus more realistic towards Fedora 30.  However,
> note that we still need that koji DNF port merged.
>
> [1]
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Detailed_Description
> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Dependencies
> --
> Michal Domonkos
> Software Engineer, Software Mgmt Subsystem
> Red Hat, Inc.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>


-- 
Dennis Gregorovic
Manager, PnT DevOps
Red Hat
dgre...@redhat.comT: +1-978.392.3112M: +1-617.901.9799
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Michal Domonkos]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
>
> == Summary ==
> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.

Just a heads-up that I have updated the proposal so that it does
*not*[2] include python2-urlgrabber, given how much it is still used
within our infra.

This should make it easier to consider the whole change proposal
self-contained and thus more realistic towards Fedora 30.  However,
note that we still need that koji DNF port merged.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Detailed_Description
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3#Dependencies
-- 
Michal Domonkos
Software Engineer, Software Mgmt Subsystem
Red Hat, Inc.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 10:23 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> koji-builder, mash and repoview are ready to work without yum ?
>

There's a pending PR for fixing koji-builder:
https://pagure.io/koji/pull-request/1117

Mash is dead and not used in infra anymore, so it doesn't matter.

RepoView just needs a patch to switch from rpmUtils and yum.comps to
rpm and libcomps Python bindings, which I think I already wrote and
put somewhere. I'll have to dig it out.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 1/30/19 1:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
> somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
> breaks?

Well, we could block yum in koji and remove it from all builders and see
what happens, but I think it will break all epel builds (unless we
switch epel to use dnf for buildroot population too) at least.

kevin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Miro Hrončok]

On 31. 01. 19 16:32, Michal Domonkos wrote:

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:46 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:

Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:

   - we change this to a system wide change
   - we move it to Fedora 31
   - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched regardless 
of
the dependent packages
   - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not fixed
by beta freeze

Contingency mechanism:

   - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to ship
Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo maintained by the
person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum (or other packages retired)

   - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in the
actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team responsible for the
tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they need them and retires them
once that is no longer true


+1

As an alternative solution, based on a discussion with Neal Gompa
today on IRC, I propose the following:

   - we remove python-urlgrabber from the original change proposal
(i.e. keeping it in F30)
   - we proceed with the retirement of the rest of the YUM stack in F30
   - we make sure the kojid PR[1] is merged in time for F30

This is based on the following two facts:

   - python-urlgrabber seems to be the last component of the YUM stack
that turns this proposal into a "system-wide" change, due to a number
of infra bits that require it (sigul, koji-containerbuild, osc or
imagefactory).   Therefore, if we just postpone the removal of
python-urlgrabber to F31 and merge that kojid PR, we could perhaps
agree on re-qualifying the change as "self-contained" (plus, there's
also the possibility of porting[2] python-urlgrabber to Python 3, but
that's for a separate discussion)
   - the kojid PR[1] is also in-line with another F30 change[3], so
there should be enough incentive to have it merged

Before I go ahead and edit the proposal: Does this variant make sense to you?


It does to me. But well, I've been called a Python 2 deletionist before, so not 
sure if I'm not biased :)



[1] https://pagure.io/koji/pull-request/1117
[2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/urlgrabber/pull/8
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal



--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Michal Domonkos]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:46 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:
>
>   - we change this to a system wide change
>   - we move it to Fedora 31
>   - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched regardless 
> of
> the dependent packages
>   - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not fixed
> by beta freeze
>
> Contingency mechanism:
>
>   - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to ship
> Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo maintained by 
> the
> person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum (or other packages 
> retired)
>
>   - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in the
> actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team responsible for 
> the
> tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they need them and retires them
> once that is no longer true

+1

As an alternative solution, based on a discussion with Neal Gompa
today on IRC, I propose the following:

  - we remove python-urlgrabber from the original change proposal
(i.e. keeping it in F30)
  - we proceed with the retirement of the rest of the YUM stack in F30
  - we make sure the kojid PR[1] is merged in time for F30

This is based on the following two facts:

  - python-urlgrabber seems to be the last component of the YUM stack
that turns this proposal into a "system-wide" change, due to a number
of infra bits that require it (sigul, koji-containerbuild, osc or
imagefactory).   Therefore, if we just postpone the removal of
python-urlgrabber to F31 and merge that kojid PR, we could perhaps
agree on re-qualifying the change as "self-contained" (plus, there's
also the possibility of porting[2] python-urlgrabber to Python 3, but
that's for a separate discussion)
  - the kojid PR[1] is also in-line with another F30 change[3], so
there should be enough incentive to have it merged

Before I go ahead and edit the proposal: Does this variant make sense to you?

[1] https://pagure.io/koji/pull-request/1117
[2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/urlgrabber/pull/8
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal

-- 
Michal Domonkos
Software Engineer, Software Mgmt Subsystem
Red Hat, Inc.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 05:46, Panu Matilainen  wrote:

> On 1/30/19 2:52 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >
>
> So basically: treat all changes as system-wide by default with a single
> proposal deadline, but if the review process discovers that a change
> truly is a self-contained one then it can be "downgraded" to
> self-contained and allow later submission into the distro. Defaulting to
> system-wide should also take away feeling of gaming the system.
>
>
Would 'allow for earlier entrance into the distro' work better. AKA if it
is self-contained they can push it into rawhide on X date and if it is
system-wide they get a date so people are aware when it happens and can
help fix/report bugs to it?

[And yes I just added 3 layers to this cake.]


> - Panu -
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Panu Matilainen]

On 1/30/19 2:52 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:



On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 07:11, Matthew Miller > wrote:


On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:49:55AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
 > > 1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the
 > > same date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be
 > > moved to SW or SC then?
 > This split between SW and SC was artificial since the beginning
and I'd
 > be happy if we dropped it.

Well, sure, it's a process we made up. In that sense, _everything_ is
artificial when you get right down to it.

The difference really is supposed to be that self-contained changes are
"FYI" advertisements to the rest of the community and valuable for
release
notes, talking points, and other docs -- they don't really need approval
(except when they actually exceed that scope). System-wide changes need
coordination and greater communication, which is why they are
supposed to be
earlier.

We could make self-contained changes due earlier and go through the same
greater review process, but then we're gonna get a lot more "ugh
Fedora is
so process-heavy and bureaucratic" and people just not doing it at all.


The problem is that people are not really seeing what a 'self-contained' 
change is and to entirely detail out what it means.. we are also a 
process-heavy and bureaucratic system. I can see why changing bash or 
removing yum both look like they are self-contained to the maintainers. 
I also can see why a lot of people can feel like this was a game to 
sneak in a change because to them it is clearly not self-contained. I 
can finally see that we are going to deal with this every release with 
more and more  band-aids.


Since this clearly isn't working as it is, how about just taking the 
decision between self-contained and system-wide away from the 
maintainer? The thing is, the maintainer doesn't always see or even know 
the bigger picture. And because us humans are lazy, we're occasionally 
tempted to try sneak something in via an easier route because "such a 
small thing really can't break anything". Everybody's been there at one 
point or the other.


So basically: treat all changes as system-wide by default with a single 
proposal deadline, but if the review process discovers that a change 
truly is a self-contained one then it can be "downgraded" to 
self-contained and allow later submission into the distro. Defaulting to 
system-wide should also take away feeling of gaming the system.


- Panu -
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 12:36 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 1/30/19 9:45 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 28. 01. 19 18:27, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
> > > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
> > > 
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
> > 
> > Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:
> > 
> >  - we change this to a system wide change
> >  - we move it to Fedora 31
> >  - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched
> > regardless of the dependent packages
> >  - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not
> > fixed by beta freeze
> 
> +1, but I would like to see some comment from koji developers that this
> is realistic with their plans or why not.
> 
> > Contingency mechanism:
> > 
> >  - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to
> > ship Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo
> > maintained by the person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum
> > (or other packages retired)
> > 
> >  - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in
> > the actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team
> > responsible for the tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they
> > need them and retires them once that is no longer true
> 
> I don't think we want to use a copr for this, but we could build the
> needed packages in our infra-f30 tag, so they would exist and be usable
> by infra but not in the main repos. Of course we would really like to
> avoid this...

Question: how plausibly can we sort of "test retire" yum? i.e. just
somehow run a single compose process without it included, and see what
breaks?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 1/30/19 9:45 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 28. 01. 19 18:27, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
>> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
> 
> Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:
> 
>  - we change this to a system wide change
>  - we move it to Fedora 31
>  - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched
> regardless of the dependent packages
>  - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not
> fixed by beta freeze

+1, but I would like to see some comment from koji developers that this
is realistic with their plans or why not.

> Contingency mechanism:
> 
>  - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to
> ship Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo
> maintained by the person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum
> (or other packages retired)
>
>  - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in
> the actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team
> responsible for the tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they
> need them and retires them once that is no longer true

I don't think we want to use a copr for this, but we could build the
needed packages in our infra-f30 tag, so they would exist and be usable
by infra but not in the main repos. Of course we would really like to
avoid this...

kevin






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Miro Hrončok]

On 28. 01. 19 18:27, Ben Cotton wrote:

(Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3


Based on the entire discussion so far, here's my proposal:

 - we change this to a system wide change
 - we move it to Fedora 31
 - we retire the packages from rawhide as soon as f30 is branched regardless of 
the dependent packages
 - packages with broken deps / FTBFS due to this will be retired if not fixed 
by beta freeze


Contingency mechanism:

 - if some process (releng or similar) needs the packages in order to ship 
Fedora 31, the packages are added into a designated copr repo maintained by the 
person/team responsible for the tool that needs yum (or other packages retired)


 - if the above is not possible and the packages are indeed needed in the 
actual f31 repos, packages are unretired but the person/team responsible for the 
tool that needs yum maintains them as long as they need them and retires them 
once that is no longer true


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Fabio Valentini]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019, 13:56 Peter Robinson  On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:41 AM Florian Weimer  wrote:
> >
> > * Miro Hrončok:
> >
> > > On 29. 01. 19 19:04, John Harris wrote:
> > >> On Monday, January 28, 2019 12:27:19 PM EST Ben Cotton wrote:
> > >>> Remove packages from the distribution:
> > >>> * createrepo
> > >>> * yum
> > >>> * yum-langpacks
> > >>> * yum-utils
> > >>> * yum-metadata-parser
> > >>> * yum-updatesd
> > >>> * python-urlgrabber
> > >>
> > >> Are there already `dnf` equivalents to `createrepo` and `yum-utils`?
> > >
> > > AFAIK createrepo_c for createrepo and dnf itself for yum-utils.
> >
> > Part of the yum-utils functionality landed in dnf-plugins-core,
> > e.g. “debuginfo-install” turned into “dnf debuginfo-install”, and the
> > latter needs dnf-plugins-core.
>
> There's still some missing pieces there, like package-cleanup, which
> in theory the dnf devs once said in reality you should never need but
> in practice I find I still regularly need to install it.
>

dnf-utils provides package-cleanup.

Fabio


> Peter
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 30. 01. 19 v 13:10 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:49:55AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> 1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the
>>> same date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be
>>> moved to SW or SC then?
>> This split between SW and SC was artificial since the beginning and I'd
>> be happy if we dropped it.
> Well, sure, it's a process we made up. In that sense, _everything_ is
> artificial when you get right down to it.
>
> The difference really is supposed to be that self-contained changes are
> "FYI" advertisements to the rest of the community and valuable for release
> notes, talking points, and other docs -- they don't really need approval
> (except when they actually exceed that scope). System-wide changes need
> coordination and greater communication, which is why they are supposed to be
> earlier.
>
> We could make self-contained changes due earlier and go through the same
> greater review process, but then we're gonna get a lot more "ugh Fedora is
> so process-heavy and bureaucratic" and people just not doing it at all.
>

I don't dispute anything of this.

But I have always said, and it is exhibited by these cases, that we
should judge the importance of the changes and their impact by the
feedback on ML and not by anything else. If you want to make the change
proposal process less bureaucratic, removing the SC vs SW distinction
would be nice start.

It should work like this:


1) I propose some change I am working on. I should provide some basic
information.

2) The proposal is published on devel{,-announce} and feedback is solicited.

3a) If there is positive feedback, just some clarifications or no
feedback at all, change is automatically accepted.

3b) When the feedback is that this might involve other parties, then
additional information, which ensures all involved parties are informed
and collaborating, should be provided (unless the information is
provided already). FESCo approval might be needed if there is no consensus.


Honestly, if I were in Michal's position, I would be thinking next time
if I should propose the change at all, because if he did it without any
approval, we would live with it anyway. But I hope we don't want to go
in this direction.


Vít

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Peter Robinson]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:41 AM Florian Weimer  wrote:
>
> * Miro Hrončok:
>
> > On 29. 01. 19 19:04, John Harris wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 28, 2019 12:27:19 PM EST Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>> Remove packages from the distribution:
> >>> * createrepo
> >>> * yum
> >>> * yum-langpacks
> >>> * yum-utils
> >>> * yum-metadata-parser
> >>> * yum-updatesd
> >>> * python-urlgrabber
> >>
> >> Are there already `dnf` equivalents to `createrepo` and `yum-utils`?
> >
> > AFAIK createrepo_c for createrepo and dnf itself for yum-utils.
>
> Part of the yum-utils functionality landed in dnf-plugins-core,
> e.g. “debuginfo-install” turned into “dnf debuginfo-install”, and the
> latter needs dnf-plugins-core.

There's still some missing pieces there, like package-cleanup, which
in theory the dnf devs once said in reality you should never need but
in practice I find I still regularly need to install it.

Peter
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 07:11, Matthew Miller 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:49:55AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > 1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the
> > > same date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be
> > > moved to SW or SC then?
> > This split between SW and SC was artificial since the beginning and I'd
> > be happy if we dropped it.
>
> Well, sure, it's a process we made up. In that sense, _everything_ is
> artificial when you get right down to it.
>
> The difference really is supposed to be that self-contained changes are
> "FYI" advertisements to the rest of the community and valuable for release
> notes, talking points, and other docs -- they don't really need approval
> (except when they actually exceed that scope). System-wide changes need
> coordination and greater communication, which is why they are supposed to
> be
> earlier.
>
> We could make self-contained changes due earlier and go through the same
> greater review process, but then we're gonna get a lot more "ugh Fedora is
> so process-heavy and bureaucratic" and people just not doing it at all.
>
>
The problem is that people are not really seeing what a 'self-contained'
change is and to entirely detail out what it means.. we are also a
process-heavy and bureaucratic system. I can see why changing bash or
removing yum both look like they are self-contained to the maintainers. I
also can see why a lot of people can feel like this was a game to sneak in
a change because to them it is clearly not self-contained. I can finally
see that we are going to deal with this every release with more and more
band-aids.

People have been complaining about how process-heavy and bureaucratic
Fedora is since we called it fedora.us. I just don't have any patience  for
it any more because many of the people who complain regularly and loudly...
also complain about every other time someone skips the processes and breaks
their stuff. We just need to face that an open distribution with multiple
developers that releases continually requires some sort of detailed
process and bureaucracy to keep things flowing. The more developers and the
more  packages, the larger the combinatorics that the processes are needed
to keep things oiled.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2019-01-29 at 14:31 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 05:42, Matthew Miller 
> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:41:26PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > > This feels more like system-wide change…
> > > > Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.
> > > 
> > > A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by this.
> > > 
> > > The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that
> > > needs to be updated needs some motivation like this.
> > 
> > "This change needs to motivate other important stuff that we don't have
> > direct control over to change" seems like *exactly* the reason we ask for
> > system-wide changes to be filed earlier.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> This is like the 4th system wide change this release which is coming in as
> a Self-Contained. Each time the developer thinks it is self-contained
> because it is just one  little thing, but on regards it turns into being a
> system-wide change. However because the two deadlines are one after the
> other, it means that this change is pushed out another 6 months where the
> 3-4 weeks between System-Wide and Self-Contained doesn't seem very long.
> Can we either:

I feel like this is a bit of a side track, when the fundamental point
here should be: "the week of the mass rebuild" seems rather late to
propose "hey let's try retiring yum again and see what breaks this time
and if we can get it fixed". I would've been all in favour of doing
that, say, a month ago. I'm less in favour of doing it now when we're
down to less than three weeks to branching. I do take the argument
relating to Python 2 deprecation...but that was known about long ago.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:49:55AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > 1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the
> > same date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be
> > moved to SW or SC then?
> This split between SW and SC was artificial since the beginning and I'd
> be happy if we dropped it.

Well, sure, it's a process we made up. In that sense, _everything_ is
artificial when you get right down to it.

The difference really is supposed to be that self-contained changes are
"FYI" advertisements to the rest of the community and valuable for release
notes, talking points, and other docs -- they don't really need approval
(except when they actually exceed that scope). System-wide changes need
coordination and greater communication, which is why they are supposed to be
earlier.

We could make self-contained changes due earlier and go through the same
greater review process, but then we're gonna get a lot more "ugh Fedora is
so process-heavy and bureaucratic" and people just not doing it at all.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 29. 01. 19 v 20:31 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
>
>
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 05:42, Matthew Miller  > wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:41:26PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >This feels more like system-wide change…
> > >Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.
> >
> > A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted
> by this.
> >
> > The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that
> > needs to be updated needs some motivation like this.
>
> "This change needs to motivate other important stuff that we don't
> have
> direct control over to change" seems like *exactly* the reason we
> ask for
> system-wide changes to be filed earlier.
>
>
>
> This is like the 4th system wide change this release which is coming
> in as a Self-Contained. Each time the developer thinks it is
> self-contained because it is just one  little thing, but on regards it
> turns into being a system-wide change. However because the two
> deadlines are one after the other, it means that this change is pushed
> out another 6 months where the 3-4 weeks between System-Wide and
> Self-Contained doesn't seem very long. Can we either:
>
> 1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the
> same date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be
> moved to SW or SC then?


This split between SW and SC was artificial since the beginning and I'd
be happy if we dropped it.

If we keep this division, I am for one deadline for both.


Vít


> 2) Move Self-Contained deadline BEFORE System-Wide so that  if it is
> really  System-Wide move it to the correct category?
> 3) Add a re-evaluate deadline after the first two? This allows us to
> get an idea that "oh wait this is going to really mess things up and
> we need to push this out one release?" or other items
>
> At the moment, I think pushing out removal of yum3 for Fedora31
> doesn't make sense if there isn't enough python2 for it to be useful
> in Fedora30. However I also think this is a system-wide change because
> a lot of tools need time to test that they REALLY do support not
> having yum3 in them. 
>
>
> -- 
> Stephen J Smoogen.
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Florian Weimer]

* Miro Hrončok:

> On 29. 01. 19 19:04, John Harris wrote:
>> On Monday, January 28, 2019 12:27:19 PM EST Ben Cotton wrote:
>>> Remove packages from the distribution:
>>> * createrepo
>>> * yum
>>> * yum-langpacks
>>> * yum-utils
>>> * yum-metadata-parser
>>> * yum-updatesd
>>> * python-urlgrabber
>>
>> Are there already `dnf` equivalents to `createrepo` and `yum-utils`?
>
> AFAIK createrepo_c for createrepo and dnf itself for yum-utils.

Part of the yum-utils functionality landed in dnf-plugins-core,
e.g. “debuginfo-install” turned into “dnf debuginfo-install”, and the
latter needs dnf-plugins-core.

Thanks,
Florian
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 05:42, Matthew Miller 
wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:41:26PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >This feels more like system-wide change…
> > >Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.
> >
> > A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by this.
> >
> > The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that
> > needs to be updated needs some motivation like this.
>
> "This change needs to motivate other important stuff that we don't have
> direct control over to change" seems like *exactly* the reason we ask for
> system-wide changes to be filed earlier.
>
>
>
This is like the 4th system wide change this release which is coming in as
a Self-Contained. Each time the developer thinks it is self-contained
because it is just one  little thing, but on regards it turns into being a
system-wide change. However because the two deadlines are one after the
other, it means that this change is pushed out another 6 months where the
3-4 weeks between System-Wide and Self-Contained doesn't seem very long.
Can we either:

1) Move System-Wide and Self-Contained proposal deadlines to be the same
date and allow FESCO/etc determine if the proposal needs to be moved to SW
or SC then?
2) Move Self-Contained deadline BEFORE System-Wide so that  if it is
really  System-Wide move it to the correct category?
3) Add a re-evaluate deadline after the first two? This allows us to get an
idea that "oh wait this is going to really mess things up and we need to
push this out one release?" or other items

At the moment, I think pushing out removal of yum3 for Fedora31 doesn't
make sense if there isn't enough python2 for it to be useful in Fedora30.
However I also think this is a system-wide change because a lot of tools
need time to test that they REALLY do support not having yum3 in them.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Miro Hrončok]

On 29. 01. 19 19:04, John Harris wrote:

On Monday, January 28, 2019 12:27:19 PM EST Ben Cotton wrote:

Remove packages from the distribution:
* createrepo
* yum
* yum-langpacks
* yum-utils
* yum-metadata-parser
* yum-updatesd
* python-urlgrabber


Are there already `dnf` equivalents to `createrepo` and `yum-utils`?


AFAIK createrepo_c for createrepo and dnf itself for yum-utils.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[John Harris]

On Monday, January 28, 2019 12:27:19 PM EST Ben Cotton wrote:
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * yum-updatesd
> * python-urlgrabber

Are there already `dnf` equivalents to `createrepo` and `yum-utils`?

-- 
John M. Harris, Jr. 
Splentity
https://splentity.com/

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Adam Jackson]

On Mon, 2019-01-28 at 12:27 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:

> == Detailed Description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * yum-updatesd
> * python-urlgrabber
> 
> All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
> them should be migrated to DNF.

I have a couple of older OSes I often need to do builds for in mock,
which OSes use yum natively. Unfortunately pyrpkg doesn't have any way
to invoke mock with --dnf, so when mock attempts to construct the
chroot it tries to use yum to do it. With this change (or indeed
already on my F29 machine without yum installed) I would no longer be
able to use fedpkg to build for those OSes.

Obviously I can work around this by invoking mock manually with an
appropriate config file, but it would be pleasant if pyrpkg was fixed
as well.

- ajax
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:41:26PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >This feels more like system-wide change…
> >Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.
> 
> A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by this.
> 
> The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that
> needs to be updated needs some motivation like this.

"This change needs to motivate other important stuff that we don't have
direct control over to change" seems like *exactly* the reason we ask for
system-wide changes to be filed earlier.



-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Lubomír Sedlář]

Igor Gnatenko píše v Po 28. 01. 2019 v 19:14 +0100:
> Which includes:
> * koji -- our buildsystem
> * pungi -- our compose tool

Not really. The only affected part is pungi-legacy subpackage, which
provides /usr/bin/pungi command. While it still has some users, it is
not part of any official release process.

> * sigul -- our signing tool for RPMs
> 
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:52 PM Miro Hrončok 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On 28. 01. 19 18:35, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > This feels more like system-wide change…
> > > 
> > > Especially since you say that some extra packages will be
> > > retired.
> > 
> > A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by
> > this.
> > 
> > The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that
> > needs to be
> > updated needs some motivation like this.
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:33 PM Ben Cotton 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
> > > > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
> > > > 
> > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
> > 
> >  >> (snip)
> > 
> > --
> > Miro Hrončok
> > --
> > Phone: +420777974800
> > IRC: mhroncok
> > ___
> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> > List Guidelines: 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Sérgio Basto]

On Mon, 2019-01-28 at 12:27 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
> 
> == Summary ==
> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
> 
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:mdomonko|Michal Domonkos]]
> * Email: mdomo...@redhat.com
> 
> == Detailed Description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * yum-updatesd
> * python-urlgrabber
> 
> All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
> them should be migrated to DNF.
> 
> Compatibility:
> * Important packages such as yum, createrepo or yum-utils will be
> provided/obsoleted by relevant packages from the dnf stack
> * Important executables such yum, repoquery, createrepo, etc. will be
> provided either as new executables or via symlinks
> 
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> Drop an old package manager that has no active upstream development.
> Move existing users to DNF which that has active development.
> Secondary benefit is reducing number of packages in Fedora that still
> depend on Python 2.
> 
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners: Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo,
> yum, yum-langpacks, yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, yum-updatesd,
> python-urlgrabber
> * Other developers: Either remove packages from the distribution or
> switch them to DNF
> * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588 #7588]
> * Policies and guidelines: N/A
> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)

koji-builder, mash and repoview are ready to work without yum ?


== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> Any tool based on YUM 3 Python API will stop working. This applies on
> any 3rd party software which won't be changed in Fedora as part of
> this change.
> CLI compatibility will be provided by DNF.
> 
> == How To Test ==
> Repoclosure passes after dropping the packages.
> 
> == User Experience ==
> There shouldn't be any impact on YUM users because the functionality
> is provided by DNF already.
> Users of tools listed in the Dependencies section shouldn't see any
> difference if the migration to DNF is done properly.
> 
> == Dependencies ==
> The list of source packages (SRPMs) that still depend on some of the
> yum-related packages to be removed:
> (see wiki page)
> 
> == Contingency Plan ==
> * Contingency mechanism: Do not remove the packages in the current
> release.
> * Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
> * Blocks release? No
> * Blocks product? No
> 
> == Documentation ==
> N/A
> 
> == Release Notes ==
> Inform end-users about removing the YUM 3 stack and definitive
> migration to DNF.
> 
> -- 
> Ben Cotton
> Fedora Program Manager
> TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
> ___
> devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 
> devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>
> == Detailed Description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> [...]
> * python-urlgrabber
>

We don't actually have to drop this one. One of the SUSE guys
submitted a pull request to port it to Python 3:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/urlgrabber/pull/8

If someone could take a look at reviewing that so it can be merged, we
can keep this package around.



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Igor Gnatenko]

Which includes:
* koji -- our buildsystem
* pungi -- our compose tool
* sigul -- our signing tool for RPMs

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:52 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
>
> On 28. 01. 19 18:35, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > This feels more like system-wide change…
> >
> > Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.
>
> A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by this.
>
> The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that needs to 
> be
> updated needs some motivation like this.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:33 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> >>
> >> (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
> >> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
> >>
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
>  >> (snip)
>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Miro Hrončok]

On 28. 01. 19 18:35, Igor Gnatenko wrote:

This feels more like system-wide change…

Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.


A very limited set. The distro as a whole should not be impacted by this.

The retired packages are legacy cruft. And the important stuff that needs to be 
updated needs some motivation like this.




On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:33 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:


(Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3

>> (snip)

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Igor Gnatenko]

This feels more like system-wide change…

Especially since you say that some extra packages will be retired.

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:33 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>
> (Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3
>
> == Summary ==
> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:mdomonko|Michal Domonkos]]
> * Email: mdomo...@redhat.com
>
> == Detailed Description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * yum-updatesd
> * python-urlgrabber
>
> All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
> them should be migrated to DNF.
>
> Compatibility:
> * Important packages such as yum, createrepo or yum-utils will be
> provided/obsoleted by relevant packages from the dnf stack
> * Important executables such yum, repoquery, createrepo, etc. will be
> provided either as new executables or via symlinks
>
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> Drop an old package manager that has no active upstream development.
> Move existing users to DNF which that has active development.
> Secondary benefit is reducing number of packages in Fedora that still
> depend on Python 2.
>
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners: Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo,
> yum, yum-langpacks, yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, yum-updatesd,
> python-urlgrabber
> * Other developers: Either remove packages from the distribution or
> switch them to DNF
> * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588 #7588]
> * Policies and guidelines: N/A
> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
>
> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> Any tool based on YUM 3 Python API will stop working. This applies on
> any 3rd party software which won't be changed in Fedora as part of
> this change.
> CLI compatibility will be provided by DNF.
>
> == How To Test ==
> Repoclosure passes after dropping the packages.
>
> == User Experience ==
> There shouldn't be any impact on YUM users because the functionality
> is provided by DNF already.
> Users of tools listed in the Dependencies section shouldn't see any
> difference if the migration to DNF is done properly.
>
> == Dependencies ==
> The list of source packages (SRPMs) that still depend on some of the
> yum-related packages to be removed:
> (see wiki page)
>
> == Contingency Plan ==
> * Contingency mechanism: Do not remove the packages in the current release.
> * Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
> * Blocks release? No
> * Blocks product? No
>
> == Documentation ==
> N/A
>
> == Release Notes ==
> Inform end-users about removing the YUM 3 stack and definitive migration to 
> DNF.
>
> --
> Ben Cotton
> Fedora Program Manager
> TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
> ___
> devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Ben Cotton]

(Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3

== Summary ==
Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.

== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:mdomonko|Michal Domonkos]]
* Email: mdomo...@redhat.com

== Detailed Description ==
Remove packages from the distribution:
* createrepo
* yum
* yum-langpacks
* yum-utils
* yum-metadata-parser
* yum-updatesd
* python-urlgrabber

All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
them should be migrated to DNF.

Compatibility:
* Important packages such as yum, createrepo or yum-utils will be
provided/obsoleted by relevant packages from the dnf stack
* Important executables such yum, repoquery, createrepo, etc. will be
provided either as new executables or via symlinks

== Benefit to Fedora ==
Drop an old package manager that has no active upstream development.
Move existing users to DNF which that has active development.
Secondary benefit is reducing number of packages in Fedora that still
depend on Python 2.

== Scope ==
* Proposal owners: Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo,
yum, yum-langpacks, yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, yum-updatesd,
python-urlgrabber
* Other developers: Either remove packages from the distribution or
switch them to DNF
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588 #7588]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)

== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Any tool based on YUM 3 Python API will stop working. This applies on
any 3rd party software which won't be changed in Fedora as part of
this change.
CLI compatibility will be provided by DNF.

== How To Test ==
Repoclosure passes after dropping the packages.

== User Experience ==
There shouldn't be any impact on YUM users because the functionality
is provided by DNF already.
Users of tools listed in the Dependencies section shouldn't see any
difference if the migration to DNF is done properly.

== Dependencies ==
The list of source packages (SRPMs) that still depend on some of the
yum-related packages to be removed:
(see wiki page)

== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Do not remove the packages in the current release.
* Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
* Blocks release? No
* Blocks product? No

== Documentation ==
N/A

== Release Notes ==
Inform end-users about removing the YUM 3 stack and definitive migration to DNF.

-- 
Ben Cotton
Fedora Program Manager
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org

F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

[Ben Cotton]

(Note this change was previously submitted for Fedora 29:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2064)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3

== Summary ==
Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.

== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:mdomonko|Michal Domonkos]]
* Email: mdomo...@redhat.com

== Detailed Description ==
Remove packages from the distribution:
* createrepo
* yum
* yum-langpacks
* yum-utils
* yum-metadata-parser
* yum-updatesd
* python-urlgrabber

All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
them should be migrated to DNF.

Compatibility:
* Important packages such as yum, createrepo or yum-utils will be
provided/obsoleted by relevant packages from the dnf stack
* Important executables such yum, repoquery, createrepo, etc. will be
provided either as new executables or via symlinks

== Benefit to Fedora ==
Drop an old package manager that has no active upstream development.
Move existing users to DNF which that has active development.
Secondary benefit is reducing number of packages in Fedora that still
depend on Python 2.

== Scope ==
* Proposal owners: Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo,
yum, yum-langpacks, yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, yum-updatesd,
python-urlgrabber
* Other developers: Either remove packages from the distribution or
switch them to DNF
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588 #7588]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)

== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Any tool based on YUM 3 Python API will stop working. This applies on
any 3rd party software which won't be changed in Fedora as part of
this change.
CLI compatibility will be provided by DNF.

== How To Test ==
Repoclosure passes after dropping the packages.

== User Experience ==
There shouldn't be any impact on YUM users because the functionality
is provided by DNF already.
Users of tools listed in the Dependencies section shouldn't see any
difference if the migration to DNF is done properly.

== Dependencies ==
The list of source packages (SRPMs) that still depend on some of the
yum-related packages to be removed:
(see wiki page)

== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Do not remove the packages in the current release.
* Contingency deadline: Beta Freeze
* Blocks release? No
* Blocks product? No

== Documentation ==
N/A

== Release Notes ==
Inform end-users about removing the YUM 3 stack and definitive migration to DNF.

-- 
Ben Cotton
Fedora Program Manager
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org