On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 10:54, Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 3/9/19 7:15 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > Hello, > > > There are a few questions I have, and since I'm not positive who all > > > of the correct people ask are, I'm sending to the epel-devel list. > > > > > > Before I start the questions, thank you to everyone who helped out in > > > getting the build failures working. Thank you. thank you. thank you. > > > > > > We have all the python packages rebuilt. All of the packages needed > > > for the rebuilds are tagged into override, and thus in the buildroot. > > > None of these rebuilt packages have been put into updates, and thus > > > are not in -testing. > > > > > > Where do we go from here? > > > A) Do I do one big update for all of the rebuilt packages? > > > > Yes. > > > > > B) Do I do individual updates for each package? > > > C) Some combination of above? > > > > Bad idea, as then some dependent packages could go out stable without > > all the packages they need. > > > > > D) Do a side tag, and take out all the overrides? > > > > Nope... side tag won't push them out, unless we just merge them into the > > main tag, but then they are bypassing testing. > > > > > I personally think C. Do the main components (rpm macros, python34 > > > and python36) in one update. All the rest get their individual > > > update. > > > > All the other ones are going to need at least python36, so no, they > > should all be in one big update. Otherwise some of them could go stable > > and not have the python36 yet. > > > > > How long do we expect to be in this testing stage? > > > > I'd say at least 2 weeks? > > > > > If packagers want to update their python package for whatever reason, > > > what should they do? > > > > Build as usual, but ask someone to edit the update and remove the > > previous one and add in the new one. > > > > Thanks for building and coordinating everything! > > > > kevin > > > > Thanks for the feedback. You too Miro. > After reading both of your reasons for doing A), I agree with you both. > Unless anyone objects, we'll plan to do option A > > We only have one package left that fails it's rebuild, python-apsw. > I'm hoping someone can figure out the reason for the %checks failling. [1] > If we can get that fixed, I'll be all set to do the mass update later today. > > If we are only going to have these builds in -testing for a couple of > weeks, how about we shoot for April 2. > I'll be unavailable from March 20-April 2. That would give us 3 weeks. > Hopefully by then we would have announcements made letting people know > the change is coming. > Sounds good. The possible 'fix' was to push to a newer version and then edit it to not look at the older version of sqlite. https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/kanarip/rpms/ python-apsw/c/3fdeffe3e799e2305c821eb7d1bb710531ef7efe?branch=epel7-py36-by-apsw 38 > Troy > > [1] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33397847 > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
