On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 08:10:30PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 30. 03. 20 18:35, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:13:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm afraid that this won't be good enough. Other (Fedora) builds will be
> > > submitted with lower prio as well. Fo
On 30. 03. 20 18:35, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:13:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I'm afraid that this won't be good enough. Other (Fedora) builds will be
submitted with lower prio as well. For example our Python 3.N+1 rebuilds are
usually submitted as such, so the wave of 3
On 27. 03. 20 16:07, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Please see the newly-updated
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
for more details[1].
Assume I have the following CI Test in Fedora:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-setuptools/blob/master/f/tests/tests.yml
Ye
Petr Pisar writes:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 12:56:42AM +0100, clime wrote:
>
>> You can make a separate namespace for this in dist-git. It doesn't
>> need to be a separate branch. That way, you won't be disturbing
>> anyone elses space.
>
> A different name space means a different repository. Th
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:13:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> I'm afraid that this won't be good enough. Other (Fedora) builds will be
> submitted with lower prio as well. For example our Python 3.N+1 rebuilds are
> usually submitted as such, so the wave of 3k packages doesn't block
> individu
On 3/30/20 2:33 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:57:22PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 30. 03. 20 13:52, Petr Pisar wrote:
If I undeestand the proposal correctly there there will be an ELN branch or
a name space. But not by default. Only for those packages that reject the
change
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:57:22PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 30. 03. 20 13:52, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > If I undeestand the proposal correctly there there will be an ELN branch or
> > a name space. But not by default. Only for those packages that reject the
> > change in Fedora.
>
> I wonder wh
On 3/30/20 12:54 PM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:11 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
It is kind of irony, that the ELN branch idea is still rejected.
I've made several attempts to explain this decision. You are ignoring them.
Therefore there will be PRs coming from Stephen's a
On 30. 03. 20 13:52, Petr Pisar wrote:
I'm more curious what will happen with the ELN branch once the change is
merged into Fedora's master. Will the ELN branch be removed? Will the ELN branch
be reset to Fedora's master indefinetely and automatically? Or will be
stalled and once ELN maintainer n
On 30. 03. 20 13:52, Petr Pisar wrote:
If I undeestand the proposal correctly there there will be an ELN branch or
a name space. But not by default. Only for those packages that reject the
change in Fedora.
I wonder where is this coming from, because that's exactly what we want and
exactly wha
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:10:17AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> It is kind of irony, that the ELN branch idea is still rejected.
> Therefore there will be PRs coming from Stephen's and Alexandra's (or
> anybody else in ELN SIG) forks of packages, containing changes needed to
> build some packages in
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 1:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 30. 03. 20 12:59, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >> Put all the other feedback aside, if we actually decide that this change is
> >> happening, can we not build ELN during the datacenter move [1], when Koji
> >> will
> >> have a very l
On 30. 03. 20 12:59, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
Put all the other feedback aside, if we actually decide that this change is
happening, can we not build ELN during the datacenter move [1], when Koji will
have a very limited capacity [2]?
I think we should go with Kevin's suggestion and deprioriti
On 30. 03. 20 12:54, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
But the fact that I need to convince Fedora packagers that they should
at least listen to the problem downstream has, and at least try to
think about how it can be addressed, through conditionals or through
refactoring, or through upstream changes..
Hi, Miro,
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:09 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 27. 03. 20 16:07, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Please see the newly-updated
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
>
> > Setup automation to trigger new ELN build every time there is a new update
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:11 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> It is kind of irony, that the ELN branch idea is still rejected.
I've made several attempts to explain this decision. You are ignoring them.
> Therefore there will be PRs coming from Stephen's and Alexandra's (or
> anybody else in ELN SIG)
On 27. 03. 20 16:07, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Please see the newly-updated
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
Setup automation to trigger new ELN build every time there is a new update
submitted to Fedora Rawhide.
Put all the other feedback aside, if we actuall
It is kind of irony, that the ELN branch idea is still rejected.
Therefore there will be PRs coming from Stephen's and Alexandra's (or
anybody else in ELN SIG) forks of packages, containing changes needed to
build some packages in ELN, which nobody is going to merge. In the
meantime, the ELN builds
On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 12:56:42AM +0100, clime wrote:
> You can make a separate namespace for this in dist-git. It doesn't need to
> be a separate branch. That way, you won't be disturbing anyone elses space.
>
A different name space means a different repository. That means a full copy.
A waste o
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 09:20, Aleksandra Fedorova
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:36 PM clime wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 13:34, Aleksandra Fedorova
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:25 PM clime
> wrote:
> > > >
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think it would be n
Otherwise, I think the change is a nice idea.
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 16:03, clime wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 15:20, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:36 PM clime wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 13:34, Aleksandra Fedorova
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 15:20, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:36 PM clime wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 13:34, Aleksandra Fedorova
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:25 PM clime wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From the proposal:
> > > >
>
On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:36 PM clime wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 13:34, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:25 PM clime wrote:
> > >
> > > From the proposal:
> > >
> > > %if 0%{?fedora} < 32 && 0%{?rhel} <= 8
> > >
> > > The fix will be done via a pu
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 13:34, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:25 PM clime wrote:
> >
> > From the proposal:
> >
> > %if 0%{?fedora} < 32 && 0%{?rhel} <= 8
> >
> > The fix will be done via a pull request that states a time limit. We
> > want the regular maintaine
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:25 PM clime wrote:
>
> From the proposal:
>
> %if 0%{?fedora} < 32 && 0%{?rhel} <= 8
>
> The fix will be done via a pull request that states a time limit. We
> want the regular maintainers to see / comment / commit, but we also
> don't want things to stall for mont
Hi, Fabio,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:42 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:12 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
> > proposal thread, but as it has
On Sunday, 29 March 2020, clime wrote:
> You can make a separate namespace for this in dist-git. It doesn't need to
> be a separate branch. That way, you won't be disturbing anyone elses space.
or simply forks...
>
> clime
>
> On Friday, 27 March 2020, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>> -BEGI
You can make a separate namespace for this in dist-git. It doesn't need to
be a separate branch. That way, you won't be disturbing anyone elses space.
clime
On Friday, 27 March 2020, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> There has been a lot of (really
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 01:06:55PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 07:10:55AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >
> > I think the question about priority was asked because:
> > When installing eln by "upgrading" from rawhide, you hardly want to go
> > package by packa
From the proposal:
%if 0%{?fedora} < 32 && 0%{?rhel} <= 8
The fix will be done via a pull request that states a time limit. We
want the regular maintainers to see / comment / commit, but we also
don't want things to stall for months and get forgotten about.
---
What kind of pull request is tha
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 07:10:55AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> I think the question about priority was asked because:
> When installing eln by "upgrading" from rawhide, you hardly want to go
> package by package, but instead want to do a single command to install
> everything tha
On 27. 03. 20 17:02, Robbie Harwood wrote:
What if I do not want to have %if's in my spec files?
As long as your package builds in ELN then just maintain your package
like normal. If there is a build failure, the ELN SIG may provide a PR
as described above or will discuss alternative approaches
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 04:45:50PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:19:01PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > > > Stephen Galla
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:19:01PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will h
So, in general I think this is a pretty cool idea and I am in favor of
it. I do think we are going to have to learn and adjust as we go here
somewhat, we can't be 100% sure of how this will pan out. Of course we
should plan as best we can now too. :)
Some random things in no particular order:
*
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > > installation media. For now the preferred way to test ELN
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 3:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > > installation media. For now the preferred way to test ELN
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > installation media. For now the preferred way to test ELN composes
> > would be to use standard Fedora Rawhide images and then include
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:07:41AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> == Summary ==
> ELN is a new buildroot and compose process for Fedora that will take
> Fedora Rawhide dist-git sources and emulate a Red Hat Enterprise Linux
> compose. Feedback from this build, compose and integration testing
> w
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher writes:
>
> > Please see the newly-updated
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
> > for more details[1].
>
> This page states:
[..]
> > Post build result to Fedora Messaging, so
Stephen Gallagher writes:
> Please see the newly-updated
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
> for more details[1].
This page states:
> The fix will be done via a pull request that states a time limit. We
> want the regular maintainers to see / comment / commit, b
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:12 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
> proposal thread, but as it has grown too large to follow anymore, I'm
> restarting it. I have made numerous changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
proposal thread, but as it has grown too large to follow anymore, I'm
restarting it. I have made numerous changes to the Change Proposal
page to improve the scope of the proposal as we
43 matches
Mail list logo
