Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> 5 - Use internal RHEL mirrors.
This is inherently not an acceptable solution for the default mock
configuration shipped to end users, because they will not have access to
those internal mirrors (and I doubt Red Hat will allow making them public,
as it would bypass
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> You're correct. With the current setup, it's also relatively simple to
> revert to the "frozen" release, which handles most of the regression
> situations. And Fedora releases are nowhere near so long-lived as RHEL
> and EPEL, so it tends to be less of a long-lived
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:11:48AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:04 AM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> > > dedicated CDN endpoint for
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:11:48AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:04 AM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> > > dedicated CDN endpoint for
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:04 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> > dedicated CDN endpoint for them, because mirrors would seriously have
> > trouble taking it.
>
> How
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 9:04 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> > dedicated CDN endpoint for them, because mirrors would seriously have
> > trouble taking it.
>
> How
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> dedicated CDN endpoint for them, because mirrors would seriously have
> trouble taking it.
How often would such packages be used? If we had a non-default repo
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:00:30AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> If Fedora and EPEL were to have older versions, we'd have to have a
> dedicated CDN endpoint for them, because mirrors would seriously have
> trouble taking it.
How often would such packages be used? If we had a non-default repo
On 29/11/2021 01:31, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
What would it take to get Fedora, or at least EPEL, to preserve old
releases in the default published repos?
Mirror owners won't be happy.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:42 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 7:06 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:42 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 7:06 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at
On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 7:06 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico
On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 7:06 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico
On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 7:06 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 2:02 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup
@Miroslav Suchý asked me to sum up my suggestions for using internal
mirrors more clearly, So, adding to his published Google Doc:
5 - Use internal RHEL mirrors.
It's difficult to license multiple RHEL releases and enable multiple
yum dnf or yum channels and supported RHEL or CentOS releases and
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > >
> > > Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
> > > > Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
> > > >
> > > > First I
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 05:20:00PM +0100, Leon Fauster wrote:
> >I mean, seriously, RH should make this easy for Fedora packagers.
>
> +1
> and COPR and mock packagers in general.
Yes, but _I_ only have one lever. :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 8:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> I wrote down the possible options and their pros and cons and I done my best
> to catch all the feedback here.
Thanks.
Another idea occurred to me, similar to "D"
(use alternatives) and incorporates "A" (delete
the current epel-8) for
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 03:10:58PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >- builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > OK as well, though [2])
>
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
>
> Getting and configuring the subscription
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 03:10:58PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >- builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > OK as well, though [2])
>
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
>
> Getting and configuring the subscription
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
> > > Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
> > >
> > > First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> >
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:19 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
> > > Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
> > >
> > > First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> >
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
> > Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
> >
> > First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> > situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and this needs to be
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:00 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and this needs to be
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 9:16 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > Neither of those have much track history.
>
> Of course they don't. How can they, when CentOS had stolen their show for
> years and the sudden "change of directions" was announced only earlier this
>
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Neither of those have much track history.
Of course they don't. How can they, when CentOS had stolen their show for
years and the sudden "change of directions" was announced only earlier this
year? Blame RH for not having given the rebuild community more time to
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 7:31 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> > situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
> > that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution
Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
> that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and this needs to be
> discussed... so here we are.
I, too, believe that
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 17:57 Nico Kadel-Garcia napsal(a):
Which is precisely why pointing it to the 'stream' release seems the
only workable solution.
That is EPEL-next
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Next#Introduction
Miroslav
___
devel mailing list
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 17:57 Nico Kadel-Garcia napsal(a):
Which is precisely why pointing it to the 'stream' release seems the
only workable solution.
That is EPEL-next
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Next#Introduction
Miroslav
___
epel-devel mailing
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:01 PM Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-).
I do not believe anyone should blame you for bringing
this up (although, it should be noted, killing the
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:55 AM Carl George wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > >OK as well, though [2])
> >
> > I cannot help
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:55 AM Carl George wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > >OK as well, though [2])
> >
> > I cannot help
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:01 AM Pavel Raiskup wrote:
>
> Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
>
> First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
> situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
> that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and
On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 10:15, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:12 AM Carl George wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription
On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 10:15, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:12 AM Carl George wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:12 AM Carl George wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > >OK as well, though [2])
> >
> >
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:12 AM Carl George wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> > >OK as well, though [2])
> >
> >
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> >OK as well, though [2])
>
> I'm going to retire all my EPEL8 packages as I can't build/test them in
>
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:37 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> >OK as well, though [2])
>
> I'm going to retire all my EPEL8 packages as I can't build/test them in
>
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:27 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:10 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> >
> > However, enough of my personal views. Since we have not used RHEL for
> > copr/mock EPEL buidlroots until now, but we used
> > a downstream freely-available RHEL-copy (CentOS Linux),
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:27 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:10 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> >
> > However, enough of my personal views. Since we have not used RHEL for
> > copr/mock EPEL buidlroots until now, but we used
> > a downstream freely-available RHEL-copy (CentOS Linux),
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> >OK as well, though [2])
>
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
>
>
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> >OK as well, though [2])
>
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
>
>
On 22. 11. 21 15:25, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
But EPEL is built against RHEL (not Alma, not Rocky).
True. As well as it is true today that it is not built against CentOS Linux
(and yet we do that in mock).
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
On 22. 11. 21 15:25, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
But EPEL is built against RHEL (not Alma, not Rocky).
True. As well as it is true today that it is not built against CentOS Linux
(and yet we do that in mock).
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
On 22/11/2021 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
- builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
OK as well, though [2])
I'm going to retire all my EPEL8 packages as I can't build/test them in
mock without any subscriptions.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev
On Mon, 2021-11-22 at 15:10 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > - builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
> >OK as well, though [2])
>
> I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
>
>
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:10 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
However, enough of my personal views. Since we have not used RHEL for copr/mock EPEL buidlroots until now, but we used
a downstream freely-available RHEL-copy (CentOS Linux), could we not continue doing so by using e.g. AlmaLinux?
For day to day
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 15:10 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
However, enough of my personal views. Since we have not used RHEL for copr/mock EPEL buidlroots until now, but we used
a downstream freely-available RHEL-copy (CentOS Linux), could we not continue doing so by using e.g. AlmaLinux?
For day to day
On 22. 11. 21 15:00, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
- builds will require a valid Red Hat subscription (the no-cost variant is
OK as well, though [2])
I cannot help myself but I consider this very unpleasant for EPEL packagers.
Getting and configuring the subscription was always so unfriendly for me
Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and this needs to be
discussed... so here we are.
By the end of the
Hello Fedora EPEL maintainers!
First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the
situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). But I believe
that we can come to acceptable Copr/Mock solution and this needs to be
discussed... so here we are.
By the end of the
56 matches
Mail list logo
