On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 20:36, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/23/20 8:01 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 14:45, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: [...] > And as I've mentioned before on this thread, we're trying to figure out > how to drop that change in earlier than we have in the past. There's > technical as well as non-technical concerns. The time period Jakub and > myself were looking at was dropping it in at the end of stage1 upstream > gcc development which would be mid Nov. But we both feel it's > imperative that the implications be discussed here and that the change > in procedure gets highlighted in the usual change proposal. Great! I'm all for landing major GCC updates as early as it makes sense for both upstream and Fedora. Does landing the update in ELN first give us any benefits compared to landing it directly in rawhide? Everybody involved with the ELN-GCC11 proposal in this thread seems to be avoiding the answer to this question. > >> This activity could have been done internally in RHEL, or externally > >> in some upstream working groups. But ELN now allows us to do this work > >> in public in Fedora, and invite Fedora community to join it, if they > >> _want_. > > How can we join, then? How is this better than doing this, say, in COPR? > > Or a rawhide side-tag. > > Right now the build is on a side tag and hasn't been merged into ELN (to > the best of my knowledge). Once the bits are merged in then I expect > anyone can join in the "fun". And yet the post starting this thread invited everyone to join. So which is it? Can I join now or must I wait until the tag is merged? > >> As we promised by the ELN Change we have provided the platform for GCC > >> upstream, RHEL downstream and Fedora community to collaborate on the > >> work for Fedora, and motivation for Red Hat to sponsor this effort. > > So far I haven't seen any clear instructions on how I can, say, rebuild > > my packages with GCC11 to catch any fall-out early. Or where you're > > going to publish (if at all) the results of any rebuilds you'll perform. > We don't generally publish them -- though we've certainly discussed it > in the past and the only impediment is my time. The jenkins server > which drives my testing is on Red Hat's internal network, but there's a > publisher that would allow us to push the build info out to a public > facing server. There's nothing inherently private and/or secret about > the work. We also use that jenkins system to do wide scale testing of > GCC work before it lands in upstream GCC. I wasn't implying there was anything secret anywhere. Thanks for the background details, though. > If you have specific packages in mind, I'm happy to let you know their > build status with gcc-11. It's just some clicking. Well, let's see. I'm interested in all my packages which have gcc* in their BuildRequires. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan _______________________________________________ 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
