Re: Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020, Christopher wrote: So, just to be absolutely clear... I can remove the file, just do epel8 as normal, and completely ignore the epel8-playground branch forever? As best as I can tell, yes. I have at least one package in epel8 that doesn't have the package.cfg and it works okay. It just doesn't build stuff automatically on epel8-playground. You might get bug reports from people who have epel8-playground enabled and can't install your package though. You might get wider input on this on the epel-devel mailing list. Also, I think there is some plan in the works to change how epel8-playground works. Can I have the extra commit that added the file removed by force-pushing the prior commit, so it's easier to fast-forward merge my 'master' branch onto epel8 without doing a bunch of crazy git merge nonsense so they have the same HEAD commit? I don't think you can force-push to dist-git so unfortunately you're stuck with that commit forever. There *is* a way to get your branches created without that commit in the first place, but it's too late for that now. Can I have the epel8-playground branch removed? I never wanted it. I know I can just ignore it and never check it out locally... but... it's going to bug me being there on the remote. Nope, you can't remove branches on dist-git. Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 9:12 AM Scott Talbert wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Aug 2020, Christopher wrote: > > > 1. Do I need epel8-playground? I want to keep the task of maintenance > > simple, and I don't want to deal with another branch to think about. I > > don't want choices, as that adds complexity. I want one simple path, > > because packaging is *not* my full time job. > > Under the normal configuration, you don't need to really worry about > epel8-playground, if you don't want to. Whatever you build in epel8 will > automatically be built in epel8-playground also. > > > 2. Can I remove the 'package.cfg' file? Is it needed? Will everything > > work with epel8-testing and going to epel8-stable if this file is > > removed? I'd really like to maintain a single git history, rather than > > two, and the presence of this file seems to interfere with that. > > (Alternatively, if the package.cfg file contained some conditional > > directive, like 'if-branch = epel8', which probably should have been > > the design, in order to support single git history packages like me, > > then I wouldn't mind the file being present in the master/rawhide > > branch, but it doesn't.) > > You can technically remove it. Then, nothing will be built in > epel8-playground automatically. It won't affect epel8. > > Scott So, just to be absolutely clear... I can remove the file, just do epel8 as normal, and completely ignore the epel8-playground branch forever? Can I have the extra commit that added the file removed by force-pushing the prior commit, so it's easier to fast-forward merge my 'master' branch onto epel8 without doing a bunch of crazy git merge nonsense so they have the same HEAD commit? Can I have the epel8-playground branch removed? I never wanted it. I know I can just ignore it and never check it out locally... but... it's going to bug me being there on the remote. Sorry for all the questions. I don't normally care about EPEL, so all this is a bit new to me. Thank you for indulging me. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020, Christopher wrote: 1. Do I need epel8-playground? I want to keep the task of maintenance simple, and I don't want to deal with another branch to think about. I don't want choices, as that adds complexity. I want one simple path, because packaging is *not* my full time job. Under the normal configuration, you don't need to really worry about epel8-playground, if you don't want to. Whatever you build in epel8 will automatically be built in epel8-playground also. 2. Can I remove the 'package.cfg' file? Is it needed? Will everything work with epel8-testing and going to epel8-stable if this file is removed? I'd really like to maintain a single git history, rather than two, and the presence of this file seems to interfere with that. (Alternatively, if the package.cfg file contained some conditional directive, like 'if-branch = epel8', which probably should have been the design, in order to support single git history packages like me, then I wouldn't mind the file being present in the master/rawhide branch, but it doesn't.) You can technically remove it. Then, nothing will be built in epel8-playground automatically. It won't affect epel8. Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 4:07 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:15:14PM -0400, Christopher wrote: > > I was recently asked to provide an EPEL8 version of one of my packages > > (python-keyring) in a bugzilla, so I did: > > fedpkg request-branch epel8 > > > > This opened up two pagure tickets, one each for two branches: > > epel8 > > epel8-playground > > > > After the branches were created, an extra commit was added to the > > epel8 branch to create a package.cfg file (with a log message that had > > extra double-quotes around it, for some reason). > > > > I have several questions: > > > > 1. Why did my request for a single branch automatically result in two > > separate tickets for two separate branches? > > 2. What is this '-playground' branch for? > > 3. Why was an extra commit added to the empty branch that was requested? > > 4. What is a package.cfg file? Do I need it? > > 5. (unimportant, but curious) How did the extra quotes get in the > > commit message that added the package.cfg file? > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/KXMMLYSAXAVHDKFFBVEFYYZHPJBWXOQQ/ Thanks, but I'm still confused on a few points. 1. Do I need epel8-playground? I want to keep the task of maintenance simple, and I don't want to deal with another branch to think about. I don't want choices, as that adds complexity. I want one simple path, because packaging is *not* my full time job. 2. Can I remove the 'package.cfg' file? Is it needed? Will everything work with epel8-testing and going to epel8-stable if this file is removed? I'd really like to maintain a single git history, rather than two, and the presence of this file seems to interfere with that. (Alternatively, if the package.cfg file contained some conditional directive, like 'if-branch = epel8', which probably should have been the design, in order to support single git history packages like me, then I wouldn't mind the file being present in the master/rawhide branch, but it doesn't.) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:15:14PM -0400, Christopher wrote: > I was recently asked to provide an EPEL8 version of one of my packages > (python-keyring) in a bugzilla, so I did: > fedpkg request-branch epel8 > > This opened up two pagure tickets, one each for two branches: > epel8 > epel8-playground > > After the branches were created, an extra commit was added to the > epel8 branch to create a package.cfg file (with a log message that had > extra double-quotes around it, for some reason). > > I have several questions: > > 1. Why did my request for a single branch automatically result in two > separate tickets for two separate branches? > 2. What is this '-playground' branch for? > 3. Why was an extra commit added to the empty branch that was requested? > 4. What is a package.cfg file? Do I need it? > 5. (unimportant, but curious) How did the extra quotes get in the > commit message that added the package.cfg file? > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/KXMMLYSAXAVHDKFFBVEFYYZHPJBWXOQQ/ -- Petr signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Questions about the 'request-branch' experience
I was recently asked to provide an EPEL8 version of one of my packages (python-keyring) in a bugzilla, so I did: fedpkg request-branch epel8 This opened up two pagure tickets, one each for two branches: epel8 epel8-playground After the branches were created, an extra commit was added to the epel8 branch to create a package.cfg file (with a log message that had extra double-quotes around it, for some reason). I have several questions: 1. Why did my request for a single branch automatically result in two separate tickets for two separate branches? 2. What is this '-playground' branch for? 3. Why was an extra commit added to the empty branch that was requested? 4. What is a package.cfg file? Do I need it? 5. (unimportant, but curious) How did the extra quotes get in the commit message that added the package.cfg file? I'm particularly concerned about item 3 and 4, because if the file must be present in epel8 and absent in master/f33/f32, then the presence of the file seems like it will prevent me from doing fast-forward merges to keep the same HEAD commit for all actively maintained branches, which I like to do to make maintenance across branches easier (using conditionals in the spec file, if necessary). Sorry if these questions have been asked before. I could not easily find concise answers to these questions pertaining to the overall `fedpkg request-branch` experience.. Thanks, Christopher ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
