On 5/1/20 1:10 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:32:26PM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
Generally speaking (I can make this a separate thread if that helps) - do we
expect every package in EPEL8 to also be built for EPEL8-playground, either
through package.cfg or by building directly from the epel8-playground
branch?
There is no such rule, but in my opinion, it is welcomed for exactly the terrible
experience anybody gets when he tries to use epel8-playground.
Right, but if some package repos are missing packages.cfg and the
maintainer does not build it separately for epel8-playground, it is a
terrible experience for other packages depending on this missing package
-- everytime the maintainer submits an epel8 build, the epel8-playground
target will report a build failure.
The purpose of epel8-playground is to diverge when needed. That's why the epel8
branch contains package.cfg by default.
That seems to be the case for packages branched normally (fedpkg
request-branch). *However* I've seen some packages where the epel8
branch and master branch are identical -- not sure how it happens, maybe
the committer has force-push permission? Or is there a way to request
that a branch be cloned from another branch instead of created from scratch?
--
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keybase.io/michel_slm
chat via email: https://delta.chat/
GPG key: 96A7 A6ED FB4D 2113 4056 3257 CAF9 AD10 ACB1 BEF2
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
