On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 3:21 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 21. 09. 24 20:00, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Sat, 2024-09-21 at 10:03 +0000, bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> Please note that this comment was generated automatically by > >> https://pagure.io/releng/blob/main/f/scripts/ftbfs-fti/follow-policy.py > > > > > > Have this scripts running on EPEL branches would help me detect FTI > > more quickly , instead be users reporting it > > > > Best regards, > > We probably could. It runs against the koji repos, so as long as it does not > want to report bugzillas for RHEL content, it should work. > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > Fedora Matrix: 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 > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue This is something that's been on my mind for a while. Uninstallable packages hurt EPEL's overall reputation. I would actually like to take this a step further than FTI bugs and also gate EPEL updates on installability. I do not think it should be allowed to push an update to stable if it is uninstallable. Even if we can't gate the updates completely, we should at least disable auto-push based on time/karma if the installability check fails. The first step will be to actually run the installability check on EPEL updates, which does not currently happen. https://github.com/fedora-ci/installability-pipeline/issues/40 I've also been toying with the idea of having an EPEL policy around this. Fedora doesn't allow uninstallable packages to sit in the repos forever, and neither should EPEL. Automatic FTI bugs would be really useful here for marking the duration, and then the policy could be something like "untag after X months of not being installable". For EPEL 10 we could do a one-off bulk untag for everything that doesn't install right before the official launch. Python has a great policy that helps in these situations. The upstream test suite SHOULD be run in %check, but if it can't a basic smoke test (e.g. %pyproject_check_import) MUST be run. This ensures that missing run-time dependencies fail the build. If you get a FTI bug for one of your Python packages, it likely means this policy isn't being followed. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_tests -- Carl George -- _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
