[EPEL-devel] Re: Is anyone still using EPEL8 Playground?

2021-12-10 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Fri, 2021-12-10 at 05:29 -0800, Troy Dawson wrote: > We (The EPEL Steering Committee) are following up on EPEL issue > 136[1] regarding the status of EPEL8 Playground. > > Looking through the logs we see that there are still people building > against playground on a regular basis.  But as I

[EPEL-devel] Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

2022-03-09 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 12:44 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > Hi Fedora, CentOS, and EPEL Communities! > > As part of our continued 3 year major Red Hat Enterprise Linux > release > cadence, RHEL 9 development is starting to wrap up with the spring > 2022 release coming soon.  That means planning for

[EPEL-devel] Re: Announcing LLVM Snapshot Packages for Fedora Linux

2022-02-01 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Tue, 2022-02-01 at 13:59 +0100, Konrad Kleine wrote: > Davide, > > thank you for your interest in this. May I ask what plans you have > using it for? We're investigating an integration into CentOS Stream. Hi Konrad, the immediate usecase for us is making it easier to do development on BPF

[EPEL-devel] Re: Announcing LLVM Snapshot Packages for Fedora Linux

2022-01-27 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Fri, 2021-10-08 at 12:13 +0200, Konrad Kleine wrote: > Dear Fedora packagers, developers and users, > > we have some good news for you: > > We are beginning to build nightly snapshot packages of LLVM for the > latest > versions of Fedora Linux (currently 34, 35 and rawhide) for a growing >

[EPEL-devel] Re: [Messaging] RabbitMQ for EPEL 9

2022-09-04 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Sat, 2022-09-03 at 13:39 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > Have you tried building the package yourself yet? When asking for > someone to support an EPEL branch it's not always straightforward. I > tried building the rawhide branch for EPEL 9 and ran into the > following: > > No matching package to

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?

2022-09-05 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Mon, 2022-09-05 at 11:33 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > It would be really nice if the wording of the bug could contain some > kind of a "thank you" note to the EPEL maintainers of the package in > question. Not everyone will understand this process as "great, I > don't > have

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?

2022-09-02 Thread Davide Cavalca via epel-devel
On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 12:12 -0500, Maxwell G via epel-devel wrote: > I think this whole process should be automated. File bugs that say > "Heads up: > your package will be automatically retired after the release of RHEL > X.X" and > provide some explanation. Agreed. This is a pretty mechanical