On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 10:37:49AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 12/11/20 5:04 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12/12/20 12:12 AM, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > There is also a problem if a missing package has been specifically > > > blocked by a module. I think libuv-devel is this way. > > > > If that happens, wouldn't it be blocked in both scenarios > > (module+grobisplitter+tagging and devel-only-component)? Or would > > grobisplitter put them in an additional repo with module_hotfixes=yes? > > > > If that's the case, it might be possible to create a separate repo with > > such packages only and manually tag them there. E.g. after a build I'd > > do `koji tag epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes foo-devel-1.6-5.el8` and > > the epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes repo would be available from EPEL 8 > > Koji/mock builds with module_hotfixes=yes. Yes, unlike the rest of this > > proposal, it requires some work (on infra to set up this extra repo and > > on packagers to remember to do the tagging, but that still sounds like > > less work than the grobisplitter proposal for both groups). > > Is there any easy way to tell if a package is explicitly blocked vs just not > being present. You can ask koji: koji list-pkgs --show-blocked --package whatever and it will tell you what tags it's blocked in with [BLOCKED] kevin _______________________________________________ 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
