On 28. 02. 20 22:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 20:42 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
* ...the Shiny New Stuff does not appear to be available on EPEL *at
all* yet - not even EPEL 8. This makes it a bit of a non-starter if you
want to use the same spec file bits across Fedora and EPEL. I realize
it may be impractical/impossible to backport everything to EPEL 7, and
am getting close to the point where I throw in the towel and drop
Python 2 support from my projects' master branches and hang the EPEL 7
package repos out on a branch, but EPEL 8 would be nice and ought to be
possible?
This stands in a way of having this in EPEL 8, AFAIK:
- no automatic RPM buildrequires
- ancient pip (PEP 517 support was added in 19.0, we have 9.0.3)
- ancient setuptools (40.8 is needed, we have 39.2.0)
- no tox (but it's being packaged for EPEL8 as we speak)
Yeep! I didn't realize we had such ancient bits in 8...
Fedora 28 if I recall correctly :(
How are we supposed to do progress in Fedora when people dislike it when it is
not included in EPEL?
I assume there's an extra "not" here. On that assumption - I understand
the problem, but if you check the history of my builds in EPEL, I'm
definitely not in that group of people :P
Cool, sorry for that assumption, it sounded like not being available on EPEL is
a show stopper.
* Unless I'm missing something, what you suggested for tox - "ideally
we should convince upstreams to only run tests with default toxenv" -
actually seems weirdly difficult to implement. AFAIK none of the
official or unofficial tox docs I can find really cover the idea of
having an environment that's *defined* but is not *default*. It seems
to be virtually universal practice with tox that you put every
environment in `envlist`...and if you just run `tox` without any `-e`
argument or special env var, it runs every environment in `envlist`.
People seem to assume all environments will be default, and if you want
to run fewer than 'all of them' you filter with `-e` or whatever.
What I meant with "ideally we should convince upstreams to only run tests with
default toxenv, not linters" was this:
`tox -e py37` should only run tests
`tox -e py38` should only run tests
`tox -e py39` should only run tests
Linters should run in `tox -e lint`, or `tox -e py38-lint`.
%tox runs `tox -e py3X` by default.
Ah, so essentially the scheme I suggested, but by 'default toxenv' you
meant the default env *of %tox*, not the default for just calling
`tox`?
Sorry for confusing terms. I basically meant "default" being anything in the
"native", "classic", "traditional", "ordinary" scheme of pyXY and non-default
anything in the scheme of pyXY-<extra> or just <custom>.
Sorry but I cannot help you have nice new things if you decide to have old
things. You need to choose - backwards compatibility or new features.
See above, I know which one I choose :P
ack.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
