[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?
On Fri, 2023-03-17 at 07:09 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 6:48 AM Patrick Riehecky > wrote: > > On Fri, 2023-03-17 at 06:22 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 6:31 PM Patrick Riehecky via epel-devel > > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2023-03-16 at 16:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 3:43 PM Kevin Fenzi > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 03:10:23PM -0700, Troy Dawson > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is what I have on my ticket. Respond soon (by > > > > > > > tomorrow > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > of day) if > > > > > > > you think I need changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: > > > > > > > Notice: will be automatically retired from > > > > > > > epel > > > > > > > when RHEL > > > > > > > . is released > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Comment: > > > > > > > Thank you for your work maintaining in > > > > > > > epel. > > > > > > > This package > > > > > > > has been considered important enough to Red Hat's > > > > > > > customers > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > Red Hat > > > > > > > has decided to promote it to be an official part of > > > > > > > RHEL. It > > > > > > > will be part > > > > > > > of RHEL .. When that is released, EPEL > > > > > > > automation > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > remove from epel. > > > > > > > > > > > > That looks pretty good, but I might suggest adding > > > > > > something > > > > > > more > > > > > > explicit at the end: > > > > > > > > > > > > Note that this issue is purely informational, you do not > > > > > > need > > > > > > to > > > > > > take any > > > > > > actions at this time. > > > > > > > > > > > > But perhaps thats overkill. ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's slight overkill, but you are correct, they might think > > > > > they > > > > > have > > > > > to do something. > > > > > I have changed the last sentence to be > > > > > > > > > > When that is released, EPEL automation will remove > > > > > from > > > > > EPEL and close this bug. > > > > > > > > > > Troy > > > > > > > > I'd consider something in a final paragraph that says > > > > "something > > > > like": > > > > > > > > No action is required from you at this time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Having an explicit "non-call to action" int its own paragraph > > > > may > > > > help > > > > folks feel more comfortable that they know what to expect and > > > > what > > > > they > > > > do/do not need to do. > > > > > > > > Pat > > > > > > > > > > > > > Although I do agree having something in a separate paragraph > > > would be > > > best, my concern is that I don't know how they are creating > > > these > > > bugs. > > > Doing a single paragraph, everything can fit between a pair of > > > quotes, and you don't have to worry about special characters. > > > That > > > always works for any scripting or automation you are working > > > with. > > > Doing a separate paragraph might be easy, it might be a pain in > > > the > > > rear. > > > > > > Troy > > > > > > h, perhaps as sentence #1 then? > > > > Pat > > > > > Good idea. I think if we put a modified version of Kevin's as the > first sentance, we get. > > > Subject: > Notice: will be automatically retired from EPEL > when RHEL . is released > Comment: > This issue is purely informational, you do not need to take any > action. Thank you for your work maintaining in EPEL > . This package has been considered important enough to Red > Hat's customers that Red Hat has decided to promote it to be an > official part of RHEL. It will be part of RHEL .. > When that is released, EPEL automation will remove from > EPEL and close this bug. That looks great to me! ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?
On Fri, 2023-03-17 at 06:22 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 6:31 PM Patrick Riehecky via epel-devel > wrote: > > On Thu, 2023-03-16 at 16:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 3:43 PM Kevin Fenzi > > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 03:10:23PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is what I have on my ticket. Respond soon (by tomorrow > > > > > end > > > > > of day) if > > > > > you think I need changes. > > > > > > > > > > Subject: > > > > > Notice: will be automatically retired from > > > > > epel > > > > > when RHEL > > > > > . is released > > > > > > > > > > Comment: > > > > > Thank you for your work maintaining in > > > > > epel. > > > > > This package > > > > > has been considered important enough to Red Hat's customers > > > > > that > > > > > Red Hat > > > > > has decided to promote it to be an official part of RHEL. It > > > > > will be part > > > > > of RHEL .. When that is released, EPEL > > > > > automation > > > > > will > > > > > remove from epel. > > > > > > > > That looks pretty good, but I might suggest adding something > > > > more > > > > explicit at the end: > > > > > > > > Note that this issue is purely informational, you do not need > > > > to > > > > take any > > > > actions at this time. > > > > > > > > But perhaps thats overkill. ;) > > > > > > > > kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's slight overkill, but you are correct, they might think they > > > have > > > to do something. > > > I have changed the last sentence to be > > > > > > When that is released, EPEL automation will remove from > > > EPEL and close this bug. > > > > > > Troy > > > > I'd consider something in a final paragraph that says "something > > like": > > > > No action is required from you at this time. > > > > > > Having an explicit "non-call to action" int its own paragraph may > > help > > folks feel more comfortable that they know what to expect and what > > they > > do/do not need to do. > > > > Pat > > > > > Although I do agree having something in a separate paragraph would be > best, my concern is that I don't know how they are creating these > bugs. > Doing a single paragraph, everything can fit between a pair of > quotes, and you don't have to worry about special characters. That > always works for any scripting or automation you are working with. > Doing a separate paragraph might be easy, it might be a pain in the > rear. > > Troy h, perhaps as sentence #1 then? Pat ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?
On Thu, 2023-03-16 at 16:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 3:43 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 03:10:23PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > This is what I have on my ticket. Respond soon (by tomorrow end > > > of day) if > > > you think I need changes. > > > > > > Subject: > > > Notice: will be automatically retired from epel > > > when RHEL > > > . is released > > > > > > Comment: > > > Thank you for your work maintaining in epel. > > > This package > > > has been considered important enough to Red Hat's customers that > > > Red Hat > > > has decided to promote it to be an official part of RHEL. It > > > will be part > > > of RHEL .. When that is released, EPEL automation > > > will > > > remove from epel. > > > > That looks pretty good, but I might suggest adding something more > > explicit at the end: > > > > Note that this issue is purely informational, you do not need to > > take any > > actions at this time. > > > > But perhaps thats overkill. ;) > > > > kevin > > > > > It's slight overkill, but you are correct, they might think they have > to do something. > I have changed the last sentence to be > > When that is released, EPEL automation will remove from > EPEL and close this bug. > > Troy I'd consider something in a final paragraph that says "something like": No action is required from you at this time. Having an explicit "non-call to action" int its own paragraph may help folks feel more comfortable that they know what to expect and what they do/do not need to do. Pat ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Re: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo
On Fri, 2022-06-17 at 06:33 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 10:22 PM Carl George wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 5:12 PM Troy Dawson > > wrote: > > > > > > I'm totally top-posting, and I apologize for that. > > > > > > For right now, I'm going to put my enable-crb script in epel- > > > release, but not automatically run it in a %post script or > > > anything. > > > The debate about putting it in a post script, or a separate > > > package, can go on independently of the script. > > > > > > This does a few things. > > > - give people a single, easy to remember way to enable crb > > > -- Right now if you install anything but RHEL you might remember > > > "dnf install epel-release" but then you forget what the dnf > > > command is to enable a repo, and you might forget if it's crb or > > > powertools. > > > -- It will make scripting easier because you just have one > > > command that will work across all RHEL compatibles. > > > > > > - gives the script a chance to find all the corner cases > > > -- It's worked on everything I've tried thus far, but I'm sure > > > there are some corner cases or two where the script doesn't work. > > > > > > I was thinking of it being > > > /usr/bin/enable-crb > > > /usr/bin/epel-enable-crb (a link to enable-crb) > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Troy > > > > > I think it would be nice to be able to both enable and disable from > > the same script. This would come in handy when you are looking for > > things that don't install when crb is disabled. I don't see > > anything > > else in Fedora or RHEL that ships a command with the name crb, so > > how > > about that? > > > > crb enable > > crb disable > > > > > That shouldn't be too hard. I'm going to give it a shot. > If that takes too long, I'll just push what I currently have for now. > > I notice that you said crb-enable, crb-disable. > Do you like having the name first, or the function first? > > enable-crb vs crb-enable ? > > either way I want to have it by itself, as well as starting with epel > > epel-enable-crb vs epel-crb-enable ? > > Troy > > I'd be tempted to go with something like: epel-crb-repo $action This way any extra ideas for actions can be added easily later on. Perhaps a "check" or "status" to see if CRB is enabled/disabled/not- what-the-os-ships. Pat ___ 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: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo
I realize this is a bit of a pipe dream, but is there "some way" to ship a repo file from EPEL that points to the crb repo(s)? Folks not wanting it could block the package/not install weak deps. Getting the right repos is a bit tricky but I figured I'd voice the idea... Pat On Sat, 2022-06-04 at 13:52 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > When I first created the EPEL issue to auto-enable crb repo[1] I was > only thinking of CAN we do it. I wasn't thinking SHOULD we do it. > We've come to the point that we actually can do it. But before we go > down that road, I wanted to take a step back and ask, should we do > it. > > The more I think about it, the more I think we shouldn't auto-enable > the crb repo for epel8 and epel9. Here are my reasons why. > > 1 - The need to auto-enable crb isn't as big as it was before. > At the time that I wrote that issue, I was getting quite alot of bugs > / pings / emails about epel packages not being installable. I think > on average about 2 a month. > With epel being in fedora-docs, and with Carl's re-write of how to > enable epel, that number has dropped significantly. I possibly still > average one a month, but that's an average over a year, with most of > them being last year. > In short, I believe the documentation is better, and easier to find, > allowing people to enable crb on their own, without automation. > > 2 - crb isn't an epel repo > We really shouldn't be messing with other repo's that we, epel, don't > own. > > 3 - We are taking the choice away from users > After I stopped and thought about it, there are plenty of scenarios > where people want epel for just one or two packages, which do not > require crb. > > 4 - All the many small side cases. > auto-enabling crb will have bugs. RHEL and it's clones are in too > many odd places for us to not hit some odd use cases we didn't > expect. We'd have to keep fixing the scripts. > > I could go into more explanation on each of those things, but in the > end, I've talked myself out of wanting to auto-enable crb for epel8 > and epel9. > But I also wanted to get others' thoughts before I close the bug and > pull request. > > What do others think? > > Troy > > > [1] - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/128 > ___ > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.fedoraproject.org_en-2DUS_project_code-2Dof-2Dconduct_&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=46SEe1P-KfUUtAfirZYHn5ATxfTJ_Q6spfT4LcmtWv44xjf03U3-eLIQq8CkFvza&s=d0B-lUzeMAZ-0S04uVby7ub-ORVZmAB6b5jp1yJRsuE&e= > > List Guidelines: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__fedoraproject.org_wiki_Mailing-5Flist-5Fguidelines&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=46SEe1P-KfUUtAfirZYHn5ATxfTJ_Q6spfT4LcmtWv44xjf03U3-eLIQq8CkFvza&s=KUWCI2iU_-iPDDRDPyScLagKSycsfAiarhiTHIQYPR0&e= > > List Archives: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.fedoraproject.org_archives_list_epel-2Ddevel-40lists.fedoraproject.org&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=46SEe1P-KfUUtAfirZYHn5ATxfTJ_Q6spfT4LcmtWv44xjf03U3-eLIQq8CkFvza&s=P7pankG6ADB2aNPcSpD1QIXMv1ATMhIvP4ovYevs5rU&e= > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pagure.io_fedora-2Dinfrastructure&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=46SEe1P-KfUUtAfirZYHn5ATxfTJ_Q6spfT4LcmtWv44xjf03U3-eLIQq8CkFvza&s=_cTkF9KBrWUy7DX9w20wQNnBshQg2EbgcQKLRhis6qY&e= > ___ 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
