Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
Le 2019-07-08 09:06, Jakub Cajka a écrit : - Original Message - From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel" To: "Christophe de Dinechin" , "Development discussions related to Fedora" Cc: "Robin Lee" , "nicolas mailhot" Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2019 8:39:12 AM Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today Le vendredi 05 juillet 2019 à 16:33 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin a écrit : > > Also, would anybody mind if I add a note on the guideline page > stating > that this is from F31 on, since the go-rpm-macros package does not > exist before. Unless there is a plan to create branches for earlier > releases? It could be done for previous releases, if someone was motivated enough. The macro code itself works, with trivial adjustments, on ancient releases like EL7. But, it depends on things in redhat-rpm- config, so backporting would demand to convince redhat-rpm-config maintainers to backport too. Anyway this is pretty academic right now, I doubt anyone would accept a backport without synchronized backport of the whole Go packageset, and that can not happen before eclipso finishes to update the stack in devel. You have omitted that the new macros stack is not fully backwards compatible, so it would require more work on fixing the packages that are affected by the breakage(AFAIK a bit under ~100). IMHO it is not a good idea to back-port this to any stable Fedora release. That’s why I wrote that a macro backport, without the mass spec cleanup & fixing eclipseo is doing in devel right now, would not be a good idea. (fixing a clean spec to use the new macro stack takes a couple of minutes; fixing the warts that accumulated in Fedora for years because the tooling was not there is something else entirely) -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
- Original Message - > From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel" > To: "Christophe de Dinechin" , "Development discussions > related to Fedora" > > Cc: "Robin Lee" , "nicolas mailhot" > > Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2019 8:39:12 AM > Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today > > Le vendredi 05 juillet 2019 à 16:33 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin a > écrit : > > > > Also, would anybody mind if I add a note on the guideline page > > stating > > that this is from F31 on, since the go-rpm-macros package does not > > exist before. Unless there is a plan to create branches for earlier > > releases? > > It could be done for previous releases, if someone was motivated > enough. The macro code itself works, with trivial adjustments, on > ancient releases like EL7. But, it depends on things in redhat-rpm- > config, so backporting would demand to convince redhat-rpm-config > maintainers to backport too. > > Anyway this is pretty academic right now, I doubt anyone would accept a > backport without synchronized backport of the whole Go packageset, and > that can not happen before eclipso finishes to update the stack in > devel. > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas Mailhot You have omitted that the new macros stack is not fully backwards compatible, so it would require more work on fixing the packages that are affected by the breakage(AFAIK a bit under ~100). IMHO it is not a good idea to back-port this to any stable Fedora release. JC > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > 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@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
Le vendredi 05 juillet 2019 à 16:33 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin a écrit : > > Also, would anybody mind if I add a note on the guideline page > stating > that this is from F31 on, since the go-rpm-macros package does not > exist before. Unless there is a plan to create branches for earlier > releases? It could be done for previous releases, if someone was motivated enough. The macro code itself works, with trivial adjustments, on ancient releases like EL7. But, it depends on things in redhat-rpm- config, so backporting would demand to convince redhat-rpm-config maintainers to backport too. Anyway this is pretty academic right now, I doubt anyone would accept a backport without synchronized backport of the whole Go packageset, and that can not happen before eclipso finishes to update the stack in devel. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
On Saturday, 29 June 2019 09:26:20 CEST Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > Hi, > > > > What should I do at this moment as a packager that maintaining some > > Go packages? > > Should I fix my packages and build against f31-go in Koji? > > > Yes, sure, if you can that would be appreciated. The vast majority of > packages is easy to clean up (just adapt the templates in go-rpm- > templates or use go2rpm), it's just there is an awful lot of them, so > Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) can not do all of them in a single > pass. > DO NOT TOUCH ANY PACKAGES BEFORE I FINISH WITH F31-GO. Otherwise I'll need to rebase my git and it will be a PITA. All packages are being updated anyway. As for your Deepin packages, Robin, I have updated according to your work on COPR. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 10:15 AM Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > > Hi, > > > What should I do at this moment as a packager that maintaining some > > Go packages? > > Should I fix my packages and build against f31-go in Koji? > > Yes, sure, if you can that would be appreciated. The vast majority of > packages is easy to clean up (just adapt the templates in go-rpm- > templates or use go2rpm), it's just there is an awful lot of them, so > Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) can not do all of them in a single > pass. It's great to see that all this stuff is finally coming together. I've tried to fix some of my broken packages locally, but I had trouble getting go2rpm to run from the sources - because AFAICT, go2rpm isn't packaged for fedora yet. Is there anything blocking a package or has just nobody worked on it yet? Fabio > If you hit one of the cases where a project needs weird stuff, or if > you do not understand something, there is help available here and in > the #fedora-golang channel. > > Please just state here (or tell eclispeo directly) what you will > convert, so you do not end up doing the same work in parallel. > > Quite often, eclipseo will have prepared things in his copr, just not > built them in koji yet. > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/eclipseo/golang-ng/ > > So taking up from where he prepared, and checking the result builds in > koji and works for you, will accelerate things. > > @eclipseo: please correct if I wrote something that does not make > things easier your side > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas Mailhot > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > 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@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
Hi, > What should I do at this moment as a packager that maintaining some > Go packages? > Should I fix my packages and build against f31-go in Koji? Yes, sure, if you can that would be appreciated. The vast majority of packages is easy to clean up (just adapt the templates in go-rpm- templates or use go2rpm), it's just there is an awful lot of them, so Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) can not do all of them in a single pass. If you hit one of the cases where a project needs weird stuff, or if you do not understand something, there is help available here and in the #fedora-golang channel. Please just state here (or tell eclispeo directly) what you will convert, so you do not end up doing the same work in parallel. Quite often, eclipseo will have prepared things in his copr, just not built them in koji yet. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/eclipseo/golang-ng/ So taking up from where he prepared, and checking the result builds in koji and works for you, will accelerate things. @eclipseo: please correct if I wrote something that does not make things easier your side Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 10:35 PM Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > > Hi, > > Fedora’s new Go packaging macros landed in rawhide (koji) today. > > The corresponding Fedora Go packaging conventions are therefore > EFFECTIVE for new rawhide builds. For the first time in Fedora’s > history, we will be able to perform Go package builds conforming to an > approved Fedora Packaging Guideline. > > Packaging documentation: > https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/guidelines/packaging-guidelines/Golang/ > and approval: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/382 > The go-rpm-templates package provides more complete info. > > F31 change page: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines > and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 > > While the guidelines will feel familiar to anyone who created a Fedora > Go packages in the last two years, they DO include a backwards- > incompatible change. Making GOPATH manipulation robust required moving > the corresponding logic to %prep with a new %goprep macro. > > Therefore, existing specs are expected to fail without the addition of > the %goprep call. > > This is of course not the end of the road, just a key step. > > It opens the way to a mass cleanup and refresh of the Fedora Go stack. > https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/901 > > A preview of this refresh is available here: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/eclipseo/golang-ng/builds/ > > Enormous thanks to > – Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) for the gigantic work done reviewing > updating and cleaning-up all those packages, and to > – Elliott Sales de Andrade (Qulogic), that picked up maintenance of > golist and fixed many of its long-standing bugs and limitations. > > Many thanks to the mock, rpm and redhat-rpm-config maintainers, > that integrated the changes, we built upon (Igor Gnatenko, Florian > Festi, Miroslav Suchý, Panu Matilainen) > > The macro set supports Go DynamicBuildRequires > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires > > They will be usable in mock as soon as rpm 4.15 lands > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.15 > > Use in koji or copr will have to wait for the corresponding refresh > buldsystem-side. So this part of the change is a technology preview for > now. > > Best regards, > > -- > Nicolas Mailhot What should I do at this moment as a packager that maintaining some Go packages? Should I fix my packages and build against f31-go in Koji? > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
- Original Message - > From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Cc: gol...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:20:40 PM > Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:39:07AM -0400, Jakub Cajka wrote: > > > F31 change page: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines > > > and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 > > > > It seems that this change has been accepted as Self Contained Change > > but IMHO it is System Wide Change as it seems to affect (nearly) all > > Go based packages in distribution(and will require work/attention of > > people that are not change owners, actually not accounted for in > > change proposal). For past several releases I have been doing rebase > > of Go compiler change(yet to be filed for F31) that is IMHO > > comparable(maybe a bit smaller) in scope and they were always deemed > > by FESCO as System Wide Changes. This really leaves me > > confused. Could someone from FESCO clarify? > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes says > > Examples include [...] a coordinated effort within a SIG with > > limited impact outside the SIG's functional area > > So in this case, even though the change affects so many packages, it > falls into the "self contained change" category. > > That said, the difference between "system-wide" and "self-contained" > boils down to two things: some additional data required in the change > page, and filing the change a bit earlier. In this case the additional > data is mostly there in the change page, and the change was filed early, > so even if we were to change the Change to "system-wide", the effect > would be cosmetic. > > Zbyszek Thank you for clarification :). IMO it would be great if that has been recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes, this approach can't be really inferred from it(at least I don't see it there). With that popped on my mind that may be calling it "early/late window change" would fit better along with recording the complexity of the change, rather then system wide, contained change. But this is really just my brain storm. Unfortunately no early changes for me as Golang release are aligned late in to the Fedora devel cycle. JC > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
- Original Message - > From: "Nicolas Mailhot" > To: "Jakub Cajka" > Cc: gol...@lists.fedoraproject.org, "Development discussions related to > Fedora" > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:23:34 AM > Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today > > Le 2019-06-12 10:39, Jakub Cajka a écrit : > > >> Fedora’s new Go packaging macros landed in rawhide (koji) today. > >> > > > > I thought that we have agreed on Go SIG meeting with eclipseo to do > > this in side tag along with golang rebase(to avoid 2 rebuilds), > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines#Summary > > “ This proposal consists of: > Packaging the new Go macros: go-rpm-macros > Getting the Guidelines approved by the FPC > Updating all Go libraries with the new macros > Mass-rebuilding all the Go package in a side tag ” > > You complain that step 3 and 4 are separate, but that’s how it was > planed from the start up and approved in the change page. > > You're conflating merging two mass Go package rebuilds (one for the new > Go compiler, and another for the new, and first, Go packaging > guidelines) with merging step 3 and 4 (which would have had other > drawbacks, that were never discussed, because that's not how we planed > things). > > And BTW it was already so in > https://pagure.io/GoSIG/go-sig/issue/20 6 months ago (though this page > is obsolete, you made us rewrite the plan in so many formats over time > I've lost track or what is up to date or not. The change page is up to > date, it’s the most recent rewrite) I guess that we have not agreed on the SIG meeting then. I don't complain and this is not in any ways personal, keep it on mind please. The change proposal predates that SIG discussion as other bit predates the change proposal. I'm pointing out that we could have avoided any breakage if we did few thing slightly differently. Currently by your actions there are several FTBFS packages, it is not really a serious issues(as I'm sure that eclipso will fix up all the packages that need it in time for Fedora 31, kudos for committing for that work :)) but it is unnecessary and avoidable inconvenience that I(and I guess others too) will have to account for(spend some time on). In my case preparing for Go rebase(I do scratch rebuilds). One of the points been also possibility to fit in the Go rebase in to that side tag, but after further discussion with eclipseo on Wednesday it will make more sense to use regular mass-rebuild for that(as I usually do) assuming that the side tag rebuild will conclude 1-2w prior to it(so I will be able to observe dist git in coherent shape). JC > > Sincerely, > > -- > Nicolas Mailhot > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:39:07AM -0400, Jakub Cajka wrote: > > F31 change page: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines > > and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 > > It seems that this change has been accepted as Self Contained Change > but IMHO it is System Wide Change as it seems to affect (nearly) all > Go based packages in distribution(and will require work/attention of > people that are not change owners, actually not accounted for in > change proposal). For past several releases I have been doing rebase > of Go compiler change(yet to be filed for F31) that is IMHO > comparable(maybe a bit smaller) in scope and they were always deemed > by FESCO as System Wide Changes. This really leaves me > confused. Could someone from FESCO clarify? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes says > Examples include [...] a coordinated effort within a SIG with > limited impact outside the SIG's functional area So in this case, even though the change affects so many packages, it falls into the "self contained change" category. That said, the difference between "system-wide" and "self-contained" boils down to two things: some additional data required in the change page, and filing the change a bit earlier. In this case the additional data is mostly there in the change page, and the change was filed early, so even if we were to change the Change to "system-wide", the effect would be cosmetic. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
Le 2019-06-12 10:39, Jakub Cajka a écrit : Fedora’s new Go packaging macros landed in rawhide (koji) today. I thought that we have agreed on Go SIG meeting with eclipseo to do this in side tag along with golang rebase(to avoid 2 rebuilds), https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines#Summary “ This proposal consists of: Packaging the new Go macros: go-rpm-macros Getting the Guidelines approved by the FPC Updating all Go libraries with the new macros Mass-rebuilding all the Go package in a side tag ” You complain that step 3 and 4 are separate, but that’s how it was planed from the start up and approved in the change page. You're conflating merging two mass Go package rebuilds (one for the new Go compiler, and another for the new, and first, Go packaging guidelines) with merging step 3 and 4 (which would have had other drawbacks, that were never discussed, because that's not how we planed things). And BTW it was already so in https://pagure.io/GoSIG/go-sig/issue/20 6 months ago (though this page is obsolete, you made us rewrite the plan in so many formats over time I've lost track or what is up to date or not. The change page is up to date, it’s the most recent rewrite) Sincerely, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
- Original Message - > From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel" > To: gol...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Cc: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org, "Nicolas > Mailhot" > Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2019 3:45:20 PM > Subject: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today > > Hi, > > Fedora’s new Go packaging macros landed in rawhide (koji) today. > I thought that we have agreed on Go SIG meeting with eclipseo to do this in side tag along with golang rebase(to avoid 2 rebuilds), so there is no observable breakage(if any would occur) for package builds and all packages "just" pop in using new macros and following new guidelines. Currently following packages are FTBFS due to this change https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/affected-by/go-srpm-macros?epoch1=0&version1=2&release1=19.fc30&epoch2=0&version2=3.0.8&release2=3.fc31&collection=f31 (thanks to qulogic for this query). And still we will have to do the side tag rebuild(for this change). We could have done that in one pass without causing any observable breakage for anyone. > The corresponding Fedora Go packaging conventions are therefore > EFFECTIVE for new rawhide builds. For the first time in Fedora’s > history, we will be able to perform Go package builds conforming to an > approved Fedora Packaging Guideline. > > Packaging documentation: > https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/guidelines/packaging-guidelines/Golang/ > and approval: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/382 > The go-rpm-templates package provides more complete info. > > F31 change page: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines > and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 It seems that this change has been accepted as Self Contained Change but IMHO it is System Wide Change as it seems to affect (nearly) all Go based packages in distribution(and will require work/attention of people that are not change owners, actually not accounted for in change proposal). For past several releases I have been doing rebase of Go compiler change(yet to be filed for F31) that is IMHO comparable(maybe a bit smaller) in scope and they were always deemed by FESCO as System Wide Changes. This really leaves me confused. Could someone from FESCO clarify? > > While the guidelines will feel familiar to anyone who created a Fedora > Go packages in the last two years, they DO include a backwards- > incompatible change. Making GOPATH manipulation robust required moving > the corresponding logic to %prep with a new %goprep macro. > > Therefore, existing specs are expected to fail without the addition of > the %goprep call. When this has been discussed, new macros have been presented to me as backwards compatible(i.e. current packages will work and build as is, although requiring refresh to adopt new features), so it has not been concern for me. Other issue that I have is that you have not communicated this change(landing the new macro package) prior it happening here or elsewhere. I'm a Go SIG member(and maintainer of the previous macros packages, which by the way are still out there) and I have not been aware of this pending change landing now. > > This is of course not the end of the road, just a key step. I would much appreciate if you would communicate a bit more before landing such a big changes(go-rpm-package) in future, it would made possible to avoid some breakages, collect feedback and improve overall packagers experience. I think that communication is not easy, at least not for me, and I don't think that it is my strong skill, but we shouldn't resign on it as it is IMO crucial part of the Fedora community. Is there something that can I do to improve the information flow from my side? JC > > It opens the way to a mass cleanup and refresh of the Fedora Go stack. > https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/901 > > A preview of this refresh is available here: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/eclipseo/golang-ng/builds/ > > Enormous thanks to > – Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) for the gigantic work done reviewing > updating and cleaning-up all those packages, and to > – Elliott Sales de Andrade (Qulogic), that picked up maintenance of > golist and fixed many of its long-standing bugs and limitations. > > Many thanks to the mock, rpm and redhat-rpm-config maintainers, > that integrated the changes, we built upon (Igor Gnatenko, Florian > Festi, Miroslav Suchý, Panu Matilainen) > > The macro set supports Go DynamicBuildRequires > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires > > They will be usable in mock as soon as rpm 4.15 lands > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.15 > > Use in koji or copr will have
New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today
Hi, Fedora’s new Go packaging macros landed in rawhide (koji) today. The corresponding Fedora Go packaging conventions are therefore EFFECTIVE for new rawhide builds. For the first time in Fedora’s history, we will be able to perform Go package builds conforming to an approved Fedora Packaging Guideline. Packaging documentation: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/guidelines/packaging-guidelines/Golang/ and approval: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/382 The go-rpm-templates package provides more complete info. F31 change page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 While the guidelines will feel familiar to anyone who created a Fedora Go packages in the last two years, they DO include a backwards- incompatible change. Making GOPATH manipulation robust required moving the corresponding logic to %prep with a new %goprep macro. Therefore, existing specs are expected to fail without the addition of the %goprep call. This is of course not the end of the road, just a key step. It opens the way to a mass cleanup and refresh of the Fedora Go stack. https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/901 A preview of this refresh is available here: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/eclipseo/golang-ng/builds/ Enormous thanks to – Robert-André Mauchin (eclipseo) for the gigantic work done reviewing updating and cleaning-up all those packages, and to – Elliott Sales de Andrade (Qulogic), that picked up maintenance of golist and fixed many of its long-standing bugs and limitations. Many thanks to the mock, rpm and redhat-rpm-config maintainers, that integrated the changes, we built upon (Igor Gnatenko, Florian Festi, Miroslav Suchý, Panu Matilainen) The macro set supports Go DynamicBuildRequires https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires They will be usable in mock as soon as rpm 4.15 lands https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.15 Use in koji or copr will have to wait for the corresponding refresh buldsystem-side. So this part of the change is a technology preview for now. Best regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
