[EPEL-devel] and about missing binary packages Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages
Hi, Sorry, this may be a little Off-topic but we notice that lame package from RHEL 8 (1) is not shipping lame package with binaries and in this case lame-devel is provided along with lame-libs , can we apply the same rules ? is completely a different situation ? (1) https://git.centos.org/rpms/lame/blob/c8/f/SPECS/lame.spec On Thu, 2021-07-01 at 15:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > I believe this is a recommendation, versus a policy. > I wanted to get people's thoughts on it, and if ya'll like it, put it > in the documentation. > > In Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 8, Red Hat decided to not ship all > packages that are built from RHEL spec files. This will also be true > of RHEL 9, and possibly future RHEL releases. These missing packages > are usually -devel packages and may impact an EPEL package build. > If your EPEL package is impacted by a missing -devel package, do the > following. > > 1 - Request the package be added to RHEL 8 and 9 CRB repository. > -- To initiate this process, please file a bug in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com and request it be added to RHEL 8 and 9. > Report the bug against the "CentOS Stream" version of the "Red Hat > Enterprise Linux 8" and/or "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9" product. > -- Be sure to say that it is impacting an EPEL build, and which package > it is impacting. > > 2 - Create an epel package that only has the missing packages. > -- Be prepared to maintain this package as long as it is needed. > -- It is recommended that you name it -epel > -- It is recommended that you add the epel-packaging-sig group as a co- > maintainer > -- It qualifies for an exception to the review process[1] so you can > request the repo with > --- fedpkg request-repo --exception -epel > -- If you need help building this, ask for help. We have some > examples. > > 3 - When/If the missing package(s) are added to RHEL CRB, retire your - > epel package. > > --- > Sorry, this is a little rushed. I wanted to get something out sooner, > rather than later. > > Troy > > [1] - > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_package_review_process > - Third bullet point -- Sérgio M. B. ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 03:05:50PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > I believe this is a recommendation, versus a policy. > I wanted to get people's thoughts on it, and if ya'll like it, put it in > the documentation. > > In Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 8, Red Hat decided to not ship all > packages that are built from RHEL spec files. This will also be true of > RHEL 9, and possibly future RHEL releases. These missing packages are > usually -devel packages and may impact an EPEL package build. > If your EPEL package is impacted by a missing -devel package, do the > following. > > 1 - Request the package be added to RHEL 8 and 9 CRB repository. > -- To initiate this process, please file a bug in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com and request it be added to RHEL 8 and 9. Report > the bug against the "CentOS Stream" version of the "Red Hat Enterprise > Linux 8" and/or "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9" product. > -- Be sure to say that it is impacting an EPEL build, and which package it > is impacting. > > 2 - Create an epel package that only has the missing packages. > -- Be prepared to maintain this package as long as it is needed. > -- It is recommended that you name it -epel --- It cannot be named (ie, the same name as the rhel source package name). > -- It is recommended that you add the epel-packaging-sig group as a > co-maintainer > -- It qualifies for an exception to the review process[1] so you can > request the repo with > --- fedpkg request-repo --exception -epel > -- If you need help building this, ask for help. We have some examples. -- keep it in sync with the RHEL version, upgrade when they do. > > 3 - When/If the missing package(s) are added to RHEL CRB, retire your -epel > package. > > --- > Sorry, this is a little rushed. I wanted to get something out sooner, > rather than later. Looks great to me aside the nitpicks above. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] proposed recommendation - missing devel packages
I believe this is a recommendation, versus a policy. I wanted to get people's thoughts on it, and if ya'll like it, put it in the documentation. In Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 8, Red Hat decided to not ship all packages that are built from RHEL spec files. This will also be true of RHEL 9, and possibly future RHEL releases. These missing packages are usually -devel packages and may impact an EPEL package build. If your EPEL package is impacted by a missing -devel package, do the following. 1 - Request the package be added to RHEL 8 and 9 CRB repository. -- To initiate this process, please file a bug in https://bugzilla.redhat.com and request it be added to RHEL 8 and 9. Report the bug against the "CentOS Stream" version of the "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8" and/or "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9" product. -- Be sure to say that it is impacting an EPEL build, and which package it is impacting. 2 - Create an epel package that only has the missing packages. -- Be prepared to maintain this package as long as it is needed. -- It is recommended that you name it -epel -- It is recommended that you add the epel-packaging-sig group as a co-maintainer -- It qualifies for an exception to the review process[1] so you can request the repo with --- fedpkg request-repo --exception -epel -- If you need help building this, ask for help. We have some examples. 3 - When/If the missing package(s) are added to RHEL CRB, retire your -epel package. --- Sorry, this is a little rushed. I wanted to get something out sooner, rather than later. Troy [1] - https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_package_review_process - Third bullet point ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
