On 10. 02. 21 20:24, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 14:19, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:On 10. 02. 21 19:53, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > fedpkg-minimal > epel-release > epel-rpm-macros Those make perfect sense to me. > fedpkg > koji > bodhi But I don't understand why those are required. What am I missing?A lot of EPEL developers do their development on an EL system and use the base tools to do so. That needs fedpkg to be on that system to talk to koji/bodhi and a host of other items. In order to get fedpkg to do that you end up needing parts of koji and bodhi because of library needs. That requires the yak train.
Oh, so this is only needed to make EPEL "self hosting" in a sense. So packagers can contribute to EPEL 9 from an EL 9 system.
I agree that this is a valuable goal, but should this be an essential part of the initial "bootstrap"?
I'm asking because I know that yak train has a lot of packages, including some deprecated that I maintain in Fedora. So I'd rather see a real maintainer deciding to package e.g. python-nose or python-mock for EPEL 9, than a SIG member who is more likely to import/build it once and move on.
-- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok _______________________________________________ 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
