[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-08 Thread Troy Dawson
On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 2:01 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 07:18:31AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > ...snipp > > I think Step 5 is a very important step (if I'm understanding it > > correctly). Because it will give us a good idea about how many people > > are utilizing

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-06 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 07:18:31AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: ...snipp > Step 5 - Send a daily report > -- Is this similar to what we send for EPEL6,7,8 ? > --- If this is true, I'm in favor of it. If not, then please explain more. > -- I have no idea about the work involved for this. I was

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-04 Thread Troy Dawson
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:18 AM Troy Dawson wrote: > Step 1 - Approve plan via Steering Committee. > Step 1a - Documents and communication > -- No releng needed. > -- Should be done along the whole way > Step 2 - Update fedpkg and remove all package.cfg from epel8. > -- Can be done by a proven

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-04 Thread Troy Dawson
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 11:18 AM Paul Howarth wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:18:31 -0700 > Troy Dawson wrote: > > Step 4 - Untag all the things that are "older" in playground > > -- currently that is a releng process. There is no way for a > > maintainer to retire their package from

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-04 Thread Paul Howarth
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:18:31 -0700 Troy Dawson wrote: > Step 4 - Untag all the things that are "older" in playground > -- currently that is a releng process. There is no way for a > maintainer to retire their package from playground. > -- This needs to happen some time (3 months?) after step 2 is

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-04 Thread Troy Dawson
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 2:08 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I think playground might be fixable/made of use without too much work... > * adjust fedpkg to stop requesting playground branches always/only > request them on explicit ask > * change the inheritence in koji so it inherits from epel8 > * untag

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-02 Thread Michel Alexandre Salim
On Wed, 2020-09-02 at 14:07 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I think playground might be fixable/made of use without too much > work... > * adjust fedpkg to stop requesting playground branches always/only > request them on explicit ask > * change the inheritence in koji so it inherits from epel8 >

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-09-02 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 08:05:14AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:08 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 09:43, Troy Dawson wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:44 AM kevin wrote: > >> > > >> > >> > > Thoughts? > >> > > >> > Well,

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-31 Thread Troy Dawson
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:08 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 09:43, Troy Dawson wrote: >> >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:44 AM kevin wrote: >> > >> >> > > Thoughts? >> > >> > Well, I think it satisfies all the use cases, but... we barely have >> > enough cycles to

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-31 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 09:43, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:44 AM kevin wrote: > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Well, I think it satisfies all the use cases, but... we barely have > > enough cycles to try and revamp playground. Do we think we have enough > > to do that and also

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-31 Thread Troy Dawson
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:44 AM kevin wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 03:11:49PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > Pros for building against stream: > > > - We would have a way to test EPEL packages that matter against the > > > not yet released RHEL version. > > > -- How often would this

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-30 Thread kevin
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 03:11:49PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > Pros for building against stream: > > - We would have a way to test EPEL packages that matter against the > > not yet released RHEL version. > > -- How often would this matter? > > -- It's hard to say. There might not be a single

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-28 Thread Leon Fauster
Am 29.08.20 um 00:11 schrieb Troy Dawson: On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote: On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote: On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: C) Drop playground. Say it was an

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-28 Thread James Cassell
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020, at 6:11 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > > > > > > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote:

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-28 Thread Troy Dawson
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote: > > > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > > > > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-27 Thread Troy Dawson
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting experiment and we > > > learned stuff, but shut it down. > > > (and clean up

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-22 Thread kevin
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting experiment and we > > learned stuff, but shut it down. > > (and clean up the package.cfg files as part of shutting it down) > > > >

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-22 Thread Pablo Sebastián Greco
On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 4:52 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 01. 08. 20 0:13, Troy Dawson wrote: We were having a good discussion about epel8-playground in the Steering Committee meeting this week. Since we ran out of time I'd like to continue it via email.

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-21 Thread Troy Dawson
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 4:52 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 01. 08. 20 0:13, Troy Dawson wrote: > > We were having a good discussion about epel8-playground in the > > Steering Committee meeting this week. Since we ran out of time I'd > > like to continue it via email. > > > > Most everyone agreed

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-19 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 01. 08. 20 0:13, Troy Dawson wrote: We were having a good discussion about epel8-playground in the Steering Committee meeting this week. Since we ran out of time I'd like to continue it via email. Most everyone agreed that playground is currently a bit of a mess and it's hard to explain to

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-01 Thread Andrew C Aitchison
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020, Kevin Fenzi wrote: B) epel8-playground is meant for future RHEL/CentOS testing, and thus everything built in epel8-playground get's built off CentOS Stream. We would continue the "build on both epel8 and epel8-playground" and this would make sure packages would be able to

[EPEL-devel] Re: Continuing playground discussion

2020-08-01 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:13:00PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > We were having a good discussion about epel8-playground in the > Steering Committee meeting this week. Since we ran out of time I'd > like to continue it via email. > > Most everyone agreed that playground is currently a bit of a