Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-24 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 8:56 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 08:45:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 1:57 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > > > On 21. 08. 20 10:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wr

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-24 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 1:57 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 21. 08. 20 10:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >> Josh listed some of the key reasons behind default streams: that > >> enterprise customers don't like to learn new commands. So default > >> streams allowed us to package content

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-21 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:41 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > I want a policy for Fedora (and I see ELN as part of Fedora) that says: > "Default > streams are not allowed." > > We already have that policy. In the IRC meeting line you quoted I expressed my > feeling that the policy also applies (and

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-21 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:08 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 20. 08. 20 20:17, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >> Yet despite all this, we got a proposal to allow default modular streams > >> in ELN. > >> The messaging about this proposal suggests that later, default

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-20 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:46 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 05. 08. 20 21:36, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > FESCo has requested that I submit the module policy once more to the > > Fedora development list for discussion. Feedback is welcome. > > > > == Requirements for

Re: InsightToolkit LTO build failure

2020-08-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:05 AM Orion Poplawski wrote: > > InsightToolkit fails to build with LTO: > > /usr/bin/ld.gold: fatal error: lto-wrapper failed > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > gmake[2]: *** >

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-05 Thread Stephen Gallagher
r the policy. You should only need to look there if you care *why* you're required to do something. I didn't want that extra info cluttering the policy itself, so I footnoted them. > More comments below. > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, at 3:36 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > * If a stream of a

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-05 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 5:38 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > Hi, Stephen. > > On Wednesday, 05 August 2020 at 21:36, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > FESCo has requested that I submit the module policy once more to the > > Fedora development list for discuss

Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-05 Thread Stephen Gallagher
FESCo has requested that I submit the module policy once more to the Fedora development list for discussion. Feedback is welcome. Plainext (asciidoc) below, much more readable HTML at https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/docs/modularity/modularity/policies/ = Policies Regarding Modules in Fedora,

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-23 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 11:01 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:56 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > On 23. 07. 20 16:53, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 23. 07. 20 16:26, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > >> I like Neal's proposal

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-23 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 5:26 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 22. 07. 20 14:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:28 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > ... > >> As said in the modularity docs PR (but I cannot find it now, because > >> pagure.

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-23 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 5:30 AM Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 09/07/2020 à 20:00, Ben Cotton a écrit : > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModularPolicy > > > There is a preview of the new policy available at > > https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/docs/modularity/modularity/policies/ > > > I

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-22 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 1:06 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Is this just about the specific URL or also about the "Naming Policy"? The Naming Policy is not currently under discussion in this proposal. Only the URL provided in the Change Proposal is applicable right now. If you want to submit a

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-22 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:28 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: ... > As said in the modularity docs PR (but I cannot find it now, because pagure.io > is down), I am not sure what is the outcome wrt default streams. Default > streams > are not allowed now. If this change proposal and the policy is approved,

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make btrfs the default file system for desktop variants

2020-07-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:03 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 7:16 pm, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > The issue isn't that you haven't done your work. It is that it looks > > like you were set up to fail. The email from Michael comes across that > > Workstation

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make btrfs the default file system for desktop variants

2020-06-30 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:22 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > The problem is that the request as discussed reads as "FESCo says use > it for workstation" vs "FESCo has no problem with Workstation saying > they want btrfs" or "FESCo says use btrfs as default". Yes it says > "desktop variants"

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make btrfs the default file system for desktop variants

2020-06-30 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:00 AM Matthew Miller wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BtrfsByDefault > > Wow! Is it 2010 already? Time flies! :) > > In seriousness: thanks for all of the effort put into this change proposal, > and the impressive list of change owners. I'm

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-24 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:38 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 06:51:36AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Yes. Putting the "stream identification" into the package name is the > > most natural solution, and has been floated various times. > > This already happens. But

Re: Orphaned 215 packages

2020-06-23 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 11:53 AM Ben Rosser wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 11:34 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 11:29 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:09 PM Stephen Gallagher < > > > sgall...@redhat.com&

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-19 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:08 AM Martin Jackson wrote: > I use flatpaks on Fedora (Discord and okular), and I've really enjoyed > the experience with them. I'm not sure how well that would translate to > the server environment though, but that general approach seems to do a > good job of

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-18 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:34 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > The issues I've seen so far affect both Fedora and RHEL, but have gotten a bit > better in Fedora. For example, a major concern that has been much worse in > Fedora than RHEL, for obvious reasons: > > One month you can do a fresh

Re: Orphaned 215 packages

2020-06-18 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:51 PM Ben Rosser wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:50 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 6:30 PM Ben Rosser wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jared K. Smith > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:41 PM Ben

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-05-18)

2020-05-18 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 = #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-05-18) = Meeting started by sgallagh at 14:59:49 UTC. The full logs are available at

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-05-18)

2020-05-18 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d

Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: Documentation for EPEL modules?

2020-05-15 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:57 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:30:04AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 6:15 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:42:15PM +0200, Antonio Trande wrote: > > > > Shortly (Martin is in Cc to confirm): > > >

Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 11:47 AM Jared K. Smith wrote: > > I'm going to disagree with you here, specifically with regards to the "I > don't care" piece. From my time in FESCo, and as the FPL before that -- I > can never remember a time when someone abstained because they didn't care. I >

Re: New set of questions for FESCo candidates?

2020-05-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:11 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 12:17:08 PM MST Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 2:49 PM John M. Harris Jr > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Monday, May 11, 2020 11:27:06 AM MST Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > > > 3. How should we

ELN Reasons (was Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy)

2020-05-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 6:56 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: > I have several reasons against ELN, which I have already stated for past > versions of your proposal (Should I really have repeated those at every > single revised version that you came up with to bypass the repeated > rejection?): > * Having

Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-11 Thread Stephen Gallagher
During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting situation for the first time: Four FESCo members voted in favor (+1) of a measure and five FESCo members opted to abstain (0) for various reasons. However, the FESCo voting policy currently reads: "A majority of the committee (that is,

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Node.js 14.x by default

2020-05-11 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > >> On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote: > >>> * Proposal owners: > >>> The pac

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Node.js 14.x by default

2020-05-08 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote: > > * Proposal owners: > > The packages are already built for Fedora 33 in a non-default module > > stream. On June 14th, 2020, the nodejs-14.x packages will become the > > default in Fedora 33 (either

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Node.js 14.x by default

2020-05-08 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 8:03 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == Detailed Description == > > Fedora 33 will ship with the latest LTS version of Node.js by default. > > This will either be the `nodejs:14` module stream or else replicated > > to the non-modular

Re: RFC: Feature macros (aka USE flags)

2020-04-27 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:47 AM Daniel Mach wrote: > > I'm wondering if this is your personal initiative or if you're sync with > ELN people. I emailed them in January about the very same idea (and I > used the very same name; we both seem to like Gentoo), we exchanged > couple emails, but never

Re: What CPU extensions can we assume are available by arch?

2020-04-27 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:52 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:28 AM Artur Iwicki wrote: >> >> Regarding x86_64 and AVX2, last year we had a very heated discussion about >> this on the mailing list. >> >>

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-04-13)

2020-04-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 = #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-04-13) = Meeting started by sgallagh at 15:01:54 UTC. The full logs are available at

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-04-13)

2020-04-12 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2020-04-13 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL8 conflict policy

2020-04-09 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:26 PM James Cassell wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020, at 9:20 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > There does not appear to be an explicit conflict policy for EPEL8: > > > >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:53 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a > lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to > clarify some of the points that we were get

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:53 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a > lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to > clarify some of the points that we were get

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:49 PM James Cassell wrote: > eln9.100.0 makes the relation to RHEL cycle obvious without looking like a > RHEL tag. Is dot allowed here? Do we need eln9_100_1? The dots would be permissible here. That said, can you describe what value you see in having the RHEL cycle

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:16 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I > > > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming > > > RHEL version, even in the DistTag? It seems to be a weird hoop to > > > separate when we

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:56 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming > RHEL version, even in the DistTag? It seems to be a weird hoop to > separate when we all know this

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 3:46 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: ... > > * Added a section explaining how we will deal with side-tags > > > Thank you for addressing this. > > However, could you please elaborate what will be the actual trigger to > do rebuild of some package in ELN? It can't be `git push` if you

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:56 PM Stephen Gallagher > wrote: > > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a > > lo

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to clarify some of the points that we were getting hung up on. Changes in this version of the proposal[2]: * Improve

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to clarify some of the points that we were getting hung up on. Changes in this version of the proposal[2]: * Improve

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:43 AM Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Michael Catanzaro" > > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > > > Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 3:37:34 PM > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-05 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 8:32 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: ... > >> For the stated reasons I am *-1 for this change in its current form*. > > > > That is your privilege as a member of FESCo. As I've said, however, I > > think you've misunderstood the situation. > > Do you want to leave it at "this is

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-03 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:27 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 10:32:31PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > > Would it be possible to formalize the kind of spec processing ELN wants > > available in a set of generic operations with generic arguments (or > > control

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-02 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:02 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 02. 04. 20 v 20:07 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > > but I *did* > > acknowledge that we are going to incorporate the possibility of > > maintaining separate specs for ELN and Rawhide for any maintainer who >

Re: @core install picking up desktop packages

2020-04-02 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 2:50 PM Steve Grubb wrote: > > On Thursday, April 2, 2020 1:55:10 PM EDT Adam Jackson wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 13:24 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've been doing some testing of F32 and was curious about something. I > > > have a kickstart

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-02 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 12:56 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > The change proposal received overly negative feedback by the packager > community > as represented both by RHEL¹ and non-RHEL maintainers. Despite being reworked > several times, none of this feedback was reflected in the proposal, only new >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-02 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 4:34 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 03:55:19PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:24 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > I disagree, both to "aren't design documents" and t

Re: Self Introduction: Kevin Buettner

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 4:08 PM Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 01 2020, Dan Čermák wrote: > > > Hi Kevin, > > > > welcome to the pack! > > > > Kevin Buettner writes: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> My name is Kevin Buettner. > >> > >> I've been involved in GDB development for over 20

Re: Why is "local" insecure PATH element ?

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:58 PM Lukas Czerner wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 11:26:04AM -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 4/1/20 4:27 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote: > > > I've noticed some failures in automated tests in bodhi, specifically > > > this one: > > > > > > { > > > "arch" :

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:24 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 11:40:49AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 6:46 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 10:02 AM David Cantrell wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 10:19:08AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >So although this update clarifies some part, we have not moved anywhere: > > > > > >~~~ > > > >=== Can we do this in a branch instead of in master? === > > > >This adds no

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 6:46 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 12:30:13PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 01. 04. 20 10:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > >On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:31:38AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >

Re: Heads-up: RPM 4.16 alpha coming to rawhide

2020-04-01 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:11 AM Panu Matilainen wrote: > > On 3/31/20 3:34 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:10 AM Panu Matilainen wrote: > >> > >> It's that time of year again... as our RPM change proposals passed with > >> flying

[EPEL-devel] Re: What is the proper way to handle python3 python36 in RHEL7

2020-03-31 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:51 PM Erinn Looney-Triggs wrote: > > I am trying to build a package for RHEL 7 and RHEL 8 that depends on an EPEL > (for RHEL 7) package python36-dbus the requires section goes like so: > Requires: %{python3} > Requires: %{python3}-dbus > > This puts in a requirement

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-03-31 Thread Stephen Gallagher
I sent out the V2 version of the Change on Friday and then promptly managed to injure myself and be away from email until today. I've read through the email threads again this morning and I decided that, rather than try to address them one by one, I'd try again with a V3 that hopefully answers

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V3

2020-03-31 Thread Stephen Gallagher
I sent out the V2 version of the Change on Friday and then promptly managed to injure myself and be away from email until today. I've read through the email threads again this morning and I decided that, rather than try to address them one by one, I'd try again with a V3 that hopefully answers

Re: How to deprecate a subpackage

2020-03-31 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 6:12 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 31. 03. 20 12:03, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I have a subpackage which is not needed anymore in the new version of the > > package. Is my assumption correct that for a smooth upgrade path I should > > simply delete the

Re: Heads-up: RPM 4.16 alpha coming to rawhide

2020-03-31 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:10 AM Panu Matilainen wrote: > > It's that time of year again... as our RPM change proposals passed with > flying colors in yesterdays meeting, I'll hope to land RPM 4.16 alpha in > rawhide later today or tomorrow by latest. > Since Panu left it out of his announcement,

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V2

2020-03-27 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Fedorova]] * Email: al...@bookwar.info * Name: [[User:Sgallagh | Stephen Gallagher]] * Email: sgall...@redhat.com [1] List of changes between the original and new versions: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes%2FELN_Buildroot_and_Compose=revision=569655=569549 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE

Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V2

2020-03-27 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Fedorova]] * Email: al...@bookwar.info * Name: [[User:Sgallagh | Stephen Gallagher]] * Email: sgall...@redhat.com [1] List of changes between the original and new versions: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes%2FELN_Buildroot_and_Compose=revision=569655=569549 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:00 PM Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > > Le mercredi 25 mars 2020 à 17:33 +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova a écrit : > > > My point was to highlight that ELN is not a "stable edition" like > > Fedora Server. ELN is Rawhide, its quality is no better than Rawhide > > quality,

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:32 PM David Tardon wrote: ... > And yes, it means that people are going to be _bothered_, and > > _pressured_ on figuring out the best way to collaborate. But isn't it > > our job? > > No, that's not what your proposal implies. Instead, people are going to > be bothered

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Starting a new sub-thread. On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:33 AM Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > As Ben is on PTO, I'd like to present the System-Wide Change > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose > > == Summary == > > The goal of the ELN project is to continuously build

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 8:29 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> Will there be a way to opt-out packages (or stacks of them) from ELN if > >> they are > >> not interesting for RHEL? > > > > We want to start with a subset of packages at the beginning (basic > > buildroot packages, system-level packages

[EPEL-devel] Re: Proposed official change to EPEL guidelines: modules and RHEL

2020-02-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 5:05 PM Troy Dawson wrote: ... > While I agree that we should be very careful with this, I do not > believe it should be completely off the table. > I believe it should be permissible with the EPEL Steering Council's > blessing, but not otherwise. > Case in point is

[EPEL-devel] Re: Proposed official change to EPEL guidelines: modules and RHEL

2020-02-25 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:57 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 04:06:32PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Consider: > > > > 1. foo rpm that is in the RHEL baseos. It's not in any module. > > Can epel make a foo (non default) module that overrides it? > > This is safe from a

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-10)

2020-02-10 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 = #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-02-10) = Meeting started by sgallagh at 15:00:03 UTC. The full logs are available at

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-10)

2020-02-10 Thread Stephen Gallagher
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d

Re: Fedora 31: dnf upgrade suddenly enables modular streams for protobuf

2019-12-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 1:52 PM Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 6:14 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > Rollback or disable explicitly. > > I had been busy testing a bunch of other packages from koji and > rollback is going to break a lot of things at this point. > Could you

Re: Fedora 31: dnf upgrade suddenly enables modular streams for protobuf

2019-12-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 12:11 PM Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Stephen Gallagher" > > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > > > Cc: "Mat Booth" , > > protobuf-

Re: Fedora 31: dnf upgrade suddenly enables modular streams for protobuf

2019-12-06 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:51 AM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Thanks for CCing me (maintainer of protobuf here), I am particularly > not happy that some module (which is not even called protobuf, but > some random Java #$%! with ripped out python support overrides my > builds). > > I have put a

Re: What are the benefits of default modular streams over non-modular packages?

2019-11-19 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 7:24 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > As Petr Pisar noted earlier, default streams are designed to deliver the > > same user experience as ursine packages, therefore there is no *direct* > > advantage or disadvantage of them over ursine packages, for

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:49 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 14. 11. 19 22:30, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:24 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: > > > >> Easy is subjective. I don't consider this easy. I consider it seriously > >> overcomp

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Easy is subjective. I don't consider this easy. I consider it seriously > overcomplicated. The idea that going modular will somehow help with current > problems in modularity is exactly what happened to eclipse. No, what happened to Eclipse

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 2:10 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 14. 11. 19 19:39, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:12 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > >> On 09. 10. 19 22:46, Ben Cotton wrote: > >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wik

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 14. 11. 19 21:32, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 3:28 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > >> On 14. 11. 19 21:15, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >>> Now, python3:3.7 vs. python

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 3:28 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 14. 11. 19 21:15, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Now, python3:3.7 vs. python3:3.8 might be a more interesting question... > > The way Python is designed, 3.7 and 3.8 is parallel installable by default. > > The o

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 3:17 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 06. 11. 19 8:29, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > M2. > > > > For traditional packages, it was consistent and easy to find package > > dependencies in Fedora. For a proven packager, Fedora Packaging Committee > > member > > or generally for

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 2:04 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Thursday, November 14, 2019 11:45:22 AM MST Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > You're assuming that parallel-install is a thing that everyone needs > > from every package on their system. > > I'm not. However, if

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 1:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 14. 11. 19 19:11, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 01:00:52PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:59 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at

Re: What are the benefits of default modular streams over non-modular packages?

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 11:39 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > I thing the canonical source of this data is: > > https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-module-defaults/tree/master > > If I understand the format correctly, the yamls that have the stream key have > default. For the record, you are correct. This

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 1:33 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Thursday, November 14, 2019 11:15:15 AM MST Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > I'm not sure what you're asking here. I thought it was pretty clear > > from the paragraph you quoted that containers are the recommended >

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:12 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 09. 10. 19 22:46, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_In_Non-Modular_Buildroot > > > > Enable module default streams in the buildroot repository for modular > > and non-modular RPMs. > > > > == Summary ==

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 11:52 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > Similarly, from the perspective of dependent maintainers, there will > > no longer be anxiety about needing to move their package to a module > > if one or more of their dependencies drops their non-modular version > > in favor of a default

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:24 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > Yes, we acknowledge that with multiple versions comes the risks of > > introducing more conflicts. We balanced that out by acknowledging that > > the container space is now mature enough that separating userspaces > > when you need to

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:19 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > I wonder who is doing to clean up all the mess in dist-git we have due > to modularity. specifically, I wonder about all these branches: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/modules/nodejs/branches?branchname=master > >

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:09 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 13. 11. 19 23:27, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > So I guess the proposal is underspecified. What I really propose, and how I > > read Miro's proposal as well (Miro, please correct me if that is not what > > you intend), is that 1. any package

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-14 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:29 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > 1) there are exactly 6 default streams in Fedora rawhide > > > > dwm > > avocado > > scala > > ant > > gimp > > maven > > > > and eclipse is being discussed. > > What about libgit2, was that not a default

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:46 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 13. 11. 19 22:15, Stephen Gallagher wrote: ... > So the buildroot enabled modular repository contains only the 2 approved > modules > including their modular metadata... > > >> "an enabled or defau

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 4:01 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 3:49 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 1:34 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > > > Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > > > > Here you seem to

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 1:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 13. 11. 19 18:31, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Sorry for the long overdue reply here. Answers to your questions are inline. > > Thank you. > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:46 PM Miro Hrončok wrot

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 1:34 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > > Here you seem to be missing the third option packager may choose - > > maintain none of them and say bye to Fedora. Which IMHO is the most likely > > outcome of all this. > > "Say bye to Fedora" is what I am

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-11-13 Thread Stephen Gallagher
Sorry for the long overdue reply here. Answers to your questions are inline. On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:46 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: ... > What I miss in the description is: > > 1. How does this thing actually work? is there an additional repository > composed > from the default streams available in

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

2019-11-12 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 4:17 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski < domi...@greysector.net> wrote: > On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 at 22:07, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 4:03 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > > wrote: > > > > > >

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >