Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 07:30:40AM -0500, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> In all this please keep in mind that Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, and SuSE
> all have python-jwt and all have this functionality, and the CentOS
> packages will not be a (feature) parity with the other 3.12.3 packages
> if the python-jwt changes are reverted for CentOS.

Indeed, and that is one of the main reasons to provide an update in case
an alternative backport is available before 3.12.4.

Niels


> 
> 
> 
> On 11/22/2017 04:36 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
>  Hi Niels,
> 
>  I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> 
>  Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is 
>  runtime
>  dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things 
>  then
>  we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except
>  signing the webhook data).
> >>> Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
> >>> problems...
> >>>
> >>> We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> >>> packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
> >>> errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm
> >>> that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> >> Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working on
> >> the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from
> >> dependency list now.
> >>
> >> @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release?
> > 
> > Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
> > managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
> > packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the dependency.
> > 
> > If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
> > 3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.
> > 
> > Niels
> > 
> > 
> >>> If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
> >>> the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
> >>> updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
> >>> wanted.
> >>>
> >>> Niels
> >>>
> 
> 
> 
>  On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > Hi Aravinda,
> >
> > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
> > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
> > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
> > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
> > and updates.
> >
> > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
> > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Niels
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org 
> >> wrote:
> >>> SRC: 
> >>> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> >>> HASH: 
> >>> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> >>>
> >>> This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> >> This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
> >> sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
> >> in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new 
> >> package
> >> in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> >>
> >> Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
> >> included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain 
> >> python-jwt
> >> longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
> >> ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> >>
> >> [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Niels
> >> ___
> >> packaging mailing list
> >> packaging@gluster.org
> >> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> 
>  -- 
>  regards
>  Aravinda VK
> 
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> regards
> >> Aravinda VK
> >>
> > ___
> > packaging mailing list
> > packaging@gluster.org
> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> > 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Kaleb
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 
In all this please keep in mind that Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, and SuSE
all have python-jwt and all have this functionality, and the CentOS
packages will not be a (feature) parity with the other 3.12.3 packages
if the python-jwt changes are reverted for CentOS.



On 11/22/2017 04:36 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
>> On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
 Hi Niels,

 I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.

 Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime
 dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then
 we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except
 signing the webhook data).
>>> Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
>>> problems...
>>>
>>> We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
>>> packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
>>> errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm
>>> that there are no problems when the package is missing?
>> Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working on
>> the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from
>> dependency list now.
>>
>> @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release?
> 
> Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
> managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
> packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the dependency.
> 
> If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
> 3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.
> 
> Niels
> 
> 
>>> If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
>>> the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
>>> updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
>>> wanted.
>>>
>>> Niels
>>>



 On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> Hi Aravinda,
>
> A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
> tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
> is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
> and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
> and updates.
>
> Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
> python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
>
> Thanks,
> Niels
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org 
>> wrote:
>>> SRC: 
>>> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
>>> HASH: 
>>> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
>>>
>>> This release is made off jenkins-release-21
>> This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
>> sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
>> in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
>> in the CentOS Storage SIG.
>>
>> Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
>> included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
>> longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
>> ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
>>
>> [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Niels
>> ___
>> packaging mailing list
>> packaging@gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

 -- 
 regards
 Aravinda VK

>>
>>
>> -- 
>> regards
>> Aravinda VK
>>
> ___
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> 

-- 

Kaleb
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 04:35:45PM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 November 2017 03:16 PM, Sahina Bose wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Niels de Vos  > > wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > > > Hi Niels,
> > > > >
> > > > > I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency.
> > This is runtime
> > > > > dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying
> > other things then
> > > > > we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features
> > work except
> > > > > signing the webhook data).
> > > > Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent
> > unforseen
> > > > problems...
> > > >
> > > > We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> > > > packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not
> > result in
> > > > errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you
> > please confirm
> > > > that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> > > Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start
> > working on
> > > the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove
> > from
> > > dependency list now.
> > >
> > > @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4
> > release?
> > 
> > Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
> > managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
> > packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the
> > dependency.
> > 
> > If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
> > 3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.
> > 
> > 
> > We did have a dependency for the eventing integration feature slated for
> > oVirt 4.2 on BZ 1501864. We already missed the beta for oVirt 4.2, so if
> > an update of RPMs is possible that would be ideal.
> 
> If we can include the dependency for 3.12.3, I will make sure to implement
> the alternative before 3.12.4 so that we can drop that dependency during
> 3.12.4 release.

It is not trivial to remove a package once it has been provided. If we
decide to include python-jws we will have to maintain it at least for
the lifetime the releases (3.12 and also 3.13?), until thet become
End-Of-Life.

Users may get (our) python-jws installed as a dependency, and from then
on it is our responsibility to keep it in an acceptible shape. Removing
the package may not be possible if other (non-Gluster) components depend
on it as well (maybe they got the package from EPEL or elsewhere).

The builds without the dependency and reverted feature backport are
being made available for testing. The CentOS Storage SIG packages will
see glusterfs-3.12.3 without JWT signing support for eventsapi.

I am sorry if oVirt expects bug 1501864 to be resolved with 3.12.3.
Unfortunately the bug does not mention this, or has anything in the
'blocks' field. Without such a description it is not clear what the
urgency of a particular change is. It probably would also have helped to
understand why a feature gets backported to a stable branch.

For now we can at least get 3.12.3 available for CentOS users. Please
open a new bug against 3.12 that can be used for backporting a solution
without python-jws dependency (if that is your plan). This new bug
should be a blocker for 3.12.4 and possibly the oVirt dependency. If
really needed, we can do a 3.12.3 update in the Storage SIG that
includes the new solution.

Thanks,
Niels


> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Niels
> > 
> > 
> > > > If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include
> > python-jws-1.5 in
> > > > the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora
> > package for
> > > > updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages
> > are much
> > > > wanted.
> > > >
> > > > Niels
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Aravinda,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At
> > the moment, I
> > > > > > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt
> > package from Fedora
> > > > > > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more
> > maintained there,
> > > > > > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the
> > coming bugfixes
> > > > > > and updates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with
> > watching over
> > > > > > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > > > > >
> >

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Aravinda 

On Wednesday 22 November 2017 03:16 PM, Sahina Bose wrote:



On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Niels de Vos > wrote:


On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > Hi Niels,
> > >
> > > I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> > >
> > > Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency.
This is runtime
> > > dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying
other things then
> > > we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features
work except
> > > signing the webhook data).
> > Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent
unforseen
> > problems...
> >
> > We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> > packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not
result in
> > errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you
please confirm
> > that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start
working on
> the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove
from
> dependency list now.
>
> @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4
release?

Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the
dependency.

If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.


We did have a dependency for the eventing integration feature slated 
for oVirt 4.2 on BZ 1501864. We already missed the beta for oVirt 4.2, 
so if an update of RPMs is possible that would be ideal.


If we can include the dependency for 3.12.3, I will make sure to 
implement the alternative before 3.12.4 so that we can drop that 
dependency during 3.12.4 release.






Niels


> > If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include
python-jws-1.5 in
> > the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora
package for
> > updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages
are much
> > wanted.
> >
> > Niels
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > Hi Aravinda,
> > > >
> > > > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At
the moment, I
> > > > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt
package from Fedora
> > > > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more
maintained there,
> > > > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the
coming bugfixes
> > > > and updates.
> > > >
> > > > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with
watching over
> > > > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Niels
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +,
jenk...@build.gluster.org  wrote:
> > > > > > SRC:

https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz


> > > > > > HASH:

https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum


> > > > > >
> > > > > > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> > > > > This release adds an additional dependency for the
glusterfs-events
> > > > > sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519
). There is no python-jwt
> > > > > in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!)
this new package
> > > > > in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which
version will be
> > > > > included in that case? I would prefer not to have to
maintain python-jwt
> > > > > longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this
package, it should
> > > > > ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> > > > >
> > > > > [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Niels
> > > > > ___
> > > > > packaging mailing list
> > > > > packaging@gluster.org 
> > > > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Sahina Bose 
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Niels de Vos  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > > Hi Niels,
> > > >
> > > > I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> > > >
> > > > Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is
> runtime
> > > > dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other
> things then
> > > > we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work
> except
> > > > signing the webhook data).
> > > Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
> > > problems...
> > >
> > > We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> > > packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
> > > errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please
> confirm
> > > that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> > Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working on
> > the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from
> > dependency list now.
> >
> > @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release?
>
> Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
> managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
> packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the dependency.
>
> If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
> 3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.
>

We did have a dependency for the eventing integration feature slated for
oVirt 4.2 on BZ 1501864. We already missed the beta for oVirt 4.2, so if an
update of RPMs is possible that would be ideal.


> Niels
>
>
> > > If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
> > > the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
> > > updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
> > > wanted.
> > >
> > > Niels
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > Hi Aravinda,
> > > > >
> > > > > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the
> moment, I
> > > > > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from
> Fedora
> > > > > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained
> there,
> > > > > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming
> bugfixes
> > > > > and updates.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
> > > > > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Niels
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +,
> jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:
> > > > > > > SRC: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/
> glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> > > > > > > HASH: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/
> glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> > > > > > This release adds an additional dependency for the
> glusterfs-events
> > > > > > sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no
> python-jwt
> > > > > > in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new
> package
> > > > > > in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version
> will be
> > > > > > included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain
> python-jwt
> > > > > > longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it
> should
> > > > > > ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Niels
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > packaging mailing list
> > > > > > packaging@gluster.org
> > > > > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > regards
> > > > Aravinda VK
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > regards
> > Aravinda VK
> >
>
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-22 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:38:32AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> > > Hi Niels,
> > > 
> > > I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> > > 
> > > Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime
> > > dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then
> > > we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except
> > > signing the webhook data).
> > Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
> > problems...
> > 
> > We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
> > packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
> > errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm
> > that there are no problems when the package is missing?
> Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working on
> the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from
> dependency list now.
> 
> @Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release?

Many thanks Aravinda! I've spoken with Jiffin (one of the 3.12 release
managers) about this as well now. I will revert the change in the
packaging for the CentOS Storage SIG, both the code and the dependency.

If a good alternative comes up, and the feature is critical to be in
3.12, we can do an update of the RPMs or wait for 3.12.4+.

Niels


> > If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
> > the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
> > updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
> > wanted.
> > 
> > Niels
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > Hi Aravinda,
> > > > 
> > > > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
> > > > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
> > > > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
> > > > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
> > > > and updates.
> > > > 
> > > > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
> > > > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Niels
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > SRC: 
> > > > > > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> > > > > > HASH: 
> > > > > > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> > > > > This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
> > > > > sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
> > > > > in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new 
> > > > > package
> > > > > in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will 
> > > > > be
> > > > > included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain 
> > > > > python-jwt
> > > > > longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
> > > > > ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> > > > > 
> > > > > [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Niels
> > > > > ___
> > > > > packaging mailing list
> > > > > packaging@gluster.org
> > > > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > regards
> > > Aravinda VK
> > > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> regards
> Aravinda VK
> 
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-21 Thread Aravinda 

On Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:29 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:

Hi Niels,

I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.

Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime
dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then
we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except
signing the webhook data).

Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
problems...

We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm
that there are no problems when the package is missing?
Without the dependency, BZ 1501864 will not work. I will start working 
on the alternate approach without using that library. We can remove from 
dependency list now.


@Sahina, Is it possible to wait for this feature till 3.12.4 release?



If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
wanted.

Niels





On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:

Hi Aravinda,

A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
and updates.

Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?

Thanks,
Niels


On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:

SRC: 
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
HASH: 
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum

This release is made off jenkins-release-21

This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
in the CentOS Storage SIG.

Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.

[Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]

Thanks,
Niels
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging


--
regards
Aravinda VK




--
regards
Aravinda VK

___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-21 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:06:59AM +0530, Aravinda wrote:
> Hi Niels,
> 
> I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.
> 
> Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is runtime
> dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other things then
> we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features work except
> signing the webhook data).

Hmm, normally new features do not get backported to prevent unforseen
problems...

We have been delayed quite a bit already, users are asking for the
packages. If dropping the dependency from the .spec does not result in
errors or tracebacks, that would be one approach. Can you please confirm
that there are no problems when the package is missing?

If there is, we'll just bite the bullet and include python-jws-1.5 in
the CentOS Storage SIG while keeping an eye on the Fedora package for
updates. Additional maintainers for this and other packages are much
wanted.

Niels

> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > Hi Aravinda,
> > 
> > A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
> > tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
> > is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
> > and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
> > and updates.
> > 
> > Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
> > python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Niels
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:
> > > > SRC: 
> > > > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> > > > HASH: 
> > > > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> > > > 
> > > > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> > > This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
> > > sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
> > > in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
> > > in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> > > 
> > > Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
> > > included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
> > > longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
> > > ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> > > 
> > > [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Niels
> > > ___
> > > packaging mailing list
> > > packaging@gluster.org
> > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
> 
> 
> -- 
> regards
> Aravinda VK
> 
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-20 Thread Aravinda 

Hi Niels,

I over looked the email about 3.12.3 release.

Please suggest what we can do for this package dependency. This is 
runtime dependency for one of the sub feature, if it is delaying other 
things then we can remove this dependency from spec file.(All features 
work except signing the webhook data).





On Monday 20 November 2017 09:59 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:

Hi Aravinda,

A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
and updates.

Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?

Thanks,
Niels


On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:

SRC: 
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
HASH: 
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum

This release is made off jenkins-release-21

This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
in the CentOS Storage SIG.

Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.

[Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]

Thanks,
Niels
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging



--
regards
Aravinda VK

___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-20 Thread Niels de Vos 
Hi Aravinda,

A reply on the questions below is still outstanding. At the moment, I
tend to think that using the most recent python-jwt package from Fedora
is the most reasonable approach. It is a little more maintained there,
and the CentOS Storage SIG can then piggy-back on the coming bugfixes
and updates.

Is there someone who wants to maintain/assist with watching over
python-jwt for the CentOS Storage SIG?

Thanks,
Niels


On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:
> > SRC: 
> > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> > HASH: 
> > https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> > 
> > This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> 
> This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
> sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
> in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
> in the CentOS Storage SIG.
> 
> Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
> included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
> longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
> ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.
> 
> [Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]
> 
> Thanks,
> Niels
> ___
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-14 Thread Nigel Babu 
Apologist for the mistake in the links. The hash linked from here will lead
to a 404. Please use
https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha512sum
instead. This was due to a change in our release job that wasn't tested as
well as it should be. As the name change suggests, we'll now be publishing
sha512sum instead of sha256sum. The fix in the Jenkins job is awaiting
reviews.

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 5:09 PM,  wrote:

> SRC: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/
> glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> HASH: https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/
> glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
>
> This release is made off jenkins-release-21
> ___
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
>
>


-- 
nigelb
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

Re: [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-3.12.3 released

2017-11-14 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:39:46AM +, jenk...@build.gluster.org wrote:
> SRC: 
> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.tar.gz
> HASH: 
> https://build.gluster.org/job/release-new/21/artifact/glusterfs-3.12.3.sha256sum
> 
> This release is made off jenkins-release-21

This release adds an additional dependency for the glusterfs-events
sub-package (https://review.gluster.org/18519). There is no python-jwt
in RHEL/CentOS-7 so, we'll need to ship (and maintain!) this new package
in the CentOS Storage SIG.

Will python-jwt become part of RHEL at one point? Which version will be
included in that case? I would prefer not to have to maintain python-jwt
longer than necessary, and when RHEL-7 ships this package, it should
ideally update the version I need to add to the Storage SIG.

[Obviously this delays packaging the update for CentOS.]

Thanks,
Niels
___
packaging mailing list
packaging@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging