2016-01-19 16:18 GMT+01:00 Orion Poplawski :
> On 01/19/2016 05:30 AM, Avram Lubkin wrote:
>>
>> So what should package maintainers do? I modified a package to use
>> python3_pkgversion and it builds fine if with_python3 is set, but it
>> doesn't seem to be set in the EPEL 7 build environment. I no
On 01/19/2016 05:30 AM, Avram Lubkin wrote:
So what should package maintainers do? I modified a package to use
python3_pkgversion and it builds fine if with_python3 is set, but it
doesn't seem to be set in the EPEL 7 build environment. I noticed a
couple packages enable it by default. Is that wha
So what should package maintainers do? I modified a package to use
python3_pkgversion and it builds fine if with_python3 is set, but it
doesn't seem to be set in the EPEL 7 build environment. I noticed a couple
packages enable it by default. Is that what we should be doing? Or should
we just build
> "DF" == Denis Fateyev writes:
DF> If we just could work "the same SRPMS name" problem around ;-)
DF> Healthy repos with the master branch orphaned [1] may look a little
DF> weird to users...
That is not abnormal for EPEL-only packages, though. The dead.package
file in master should simply
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Orion Poplawski
wrote:
> On 12/30/2015 10:00 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > On 12/30/2015 12:16 AM, Denis Fateyev wrote:
> >> Actually, I've opened a bug against 'msgpack':
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290393
> ...
> >
> > Some reviews are un
On 12/30/2015 10:00 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 12/30/2015 12:16 AM, Denis Fateyev wrote:
>> Actually, I've opened a bug against 'msgpack':
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290393
>>
>> What we actually need is to clarify and officially approve python3 epel
>> proposal and guidel
On 12/30/2015 12:16 AM, Denis Fateyev wrote:
> Actually, I've opened a bug against 'msgpack':
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290393
>
> What we actually need is to clarify and officially approve python3 epel
> proposal and guidelines, to start packaging things for epel7.
>
> I'm r
Actually, I've opened a bug against 'msgpack':
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290393
What we actually need is to clarify and officially approve python3 epel
proposal and guidelines, to start packaging things for epel7.
I'm ready to help out with packaging and testing python34 things
On 11/25/2015 09:06 AM, Denis Fateyev wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> To package some python3-based stuff I need 'msgpack', 'llfuse', 'Cython'
> modules built for Python 3.4 which is the current version of Python 3 in
> epel7.
>
> Would it be reasonable to file a bug against 'python-msgpack', et al. i
