Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On 2015-01-29, 01:29 GMT, Peter Hutterer wrote: I don't have numbers on how many packages have this need but I predict that the efforts to get this to work, test it, deploy it, etc. are vastly greater than the time saved not having to retire a package :) Certainly, but a) we are geeks, so we want to have things Working Right™, b) when the work on pkgdb is open (https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5931) it is really not a big deal to add one more feature. Matěj -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:09:04 +0100 Matěj Cepl mc...@cepl.eu wrote: On 2015-01-29, 01:29 GMT, Peter Hutterer wrote: I don't have numbers on how many packages have this need but I predict that the efforts to get this to work, test it, deploy it, etc. are vastly greater than the time saved not having to retire a package :) Certainly, but a) we are geeks, so we want to have things Working Right™, Sure. If I had the time to get every little thing working right, I would sure love it. ;) Finding the time for corner cases is sometimes difficult though. b) when the work on pkgdb is open (https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5931) it is really not a big deal to add one more feature. Sure, please feel free to suggest it in a ticket and/or help work to make it happen. kevin pgp4_eUKI7JTp.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 20:48:02 +0100 Matěj Cepl mc...@cepl.eu wrote: Hi, this is a question which I have encountered couple of times, but I have always forgot to ask about it: is it possible to have a package without Rawhide (devel) branch? Nope. I have just created (and got approved) python-mako1.0 as a compatibility package for EPEL-6. When I asked for the new repo for it, I expect to get also devel/Rawhide branch for it. However, I don't see any purpose of it. Should I just orphan the devel branch of it? Or is there a way how to get a package without it in the first place? Shouldn't it be possible? Yes, just retire and add a dead.package the devel branch. There's no better way to do this currently. kevin pgpnWMkrpopCn.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On 2015-01-28, 21:10 GMT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: I have just created (and got approved) python-mako1.0 as a compatibility package for EPEL-6. When I asked for the new repo for it, I expect to get also devel/Rawhide branch for it. However, I don't see any purpose of it. Should I just orphan the devel branch of it? Or is there a way how to get a package without it in the first place? Shouldn't it be possible? Yes, just retire and add a dead.package the devel branch. There's no better way to do this currently. And couldn't we make the script which builds the repos understand some syntax extension to do it? E.g., what about New Package SCM Request === Package Name: foo Short Description: fobricates bar Upstream URL: http://pkgname-project.org/pkgname Owners: jdoe Branches: el6 epel7 -devel InitialCC: Perhaps it would do just the retirement of devel branch. What about that? Best, Matěj -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 01:04:34AM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: On 2015-01-28, 21:10 GMT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: I have just created (and got approved) python-mako1.0 as a compatibility package for EPEL-6. When I asked for the new repo for it, I expect to get also devel/Rawhide branch for it. However, I don't see any purpose of it. Should I just orphan the devel branch of it? Or is there a way how to get a package without it in the first place? Shouldn't it be possible? Yes, just retire and add a dead.package the devel branch. There's no better way to do this currently. And couldn't we make the script which builds the repos understand some syntax extension to do it? E.g., what about New Package SCM Request === Package Name: foo Short Description: fobricates bar Upstream URL: http://pkgname-project.org/pkgname Owners: jdoe Branches: el6 epel7 -devel InitialCC: Perhaps it would do just the retirement of devel branch. What about that? I don't have numbers on how many packages have this need but I predict that the efforts to get this to work, test it, deploy it, etc. are vastly greater than the time saved not having to retire a package :) Cheers, Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Packages without the Rawhide branch?
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 01:04:34AM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: And couldn't we make the script which builds the repos understand some syntax extension to do it? E.g., what about Perhaps it would do just the retirement of devel branch. What about that? The process is going to change soon: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5931 There is at least an interface that allows to not select the devel branch. But I am not sure what is happening then. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
