Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released
On Wednesday 22 November 2017 03:16 PM, Sahina Bose wrote:
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Niels de Vos <nde...@redhat.com
<mailto:nde...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > Hi Niels,
> > >
> > > I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> > >
> > > Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency.
This is runtime
> > > dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying
other things then
> > > we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features
work except
> > > signing the webhook data).
> > Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent
unforseen
> > problems...
> >
> > We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> > packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not
result in
> > errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you
please confirm
> > that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start
working on
> the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove
from
> dependency list now.
>
> @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4
release?
Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the
dependency.
If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.
We did have a dependency for the eventing integration feature slated
for oVirt 4.2 on BZ 1501864. We already missed the beta for oVirt 4.2,
so if an update of RPMs is possible that would be ideal.
If we can include the dependency for 3.12.3, I will make sure to
implement the alternative before 3.12.4 so that we can drop that
dependency during 3.12.4 release.
Niels
> > If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include
python-jws-1.5 in
> > the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora
package for
> > updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages
are much
> > wanted.
> >
> > Niels
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > Hi Aravinda,
> > > >
> > > > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At
the moment, I
> > > > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt
package from Fedora
> > > > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more
maintained there,
> > > > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the
coming bugfixes
> > > > and updates.
> > > >
> > > > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with
watching over
> > > > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Niels
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +,
jenk...@build.gluster.org <mailto:jenk...@build.gluster.org> wrote:
> > > > > > SRC:
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
<https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz>
> > > > > > HASH:
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
<https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> > > > > This release adds an additional dependency for the
glusterfs-events
> > > > > sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519
<https://review.gluster.org/18519>). There is no python-jwt
> > > > > in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!)
this new package
> > > > > in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which
version will be
> > > > > included in that case?
Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released
On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote: Hi Niels, I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release. Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except signing the webhook data). Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen problems... We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm that there are no problems when the package is missing? Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working on the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from dependency list now. @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release? If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much wanted. Niels On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: Hi Aravinda, A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there, and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes and updates. Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG? Thanks, Niels On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote: On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote: SRC: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz HASH: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum This release is made off jenkins-release-21 This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package in the CentOS Storage SIG. Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG. [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.] Thanks, Niels ___ packaging mailing list packaging@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging -- regards Aravinda VK -- regards Aravinda VK ___ packaging mailing list packaging@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released
Hi Niels, I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release. Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except signing the webhook data). On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: Hi Aravinda, A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there, and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes and updates. Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG? Thanks, Niels On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote: On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote: SRC: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz HASH: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum This release is made off jenkins-release-21 This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package in the CentOS Storage SIG. Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG. [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.] Thanks, Niels ___ packaging mailing list packaging@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging -- regards Aravinda VK ___ packaging mailing list packaging@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
