Here are some patches for the copr-cli.
- Fix the exception generated when trying to read the copr_url from a
non-existant configuration file
- I rework the layout of the copr-cli list command, the table was not scaling
with projects having large description
- Add a man page for copr-cli to provide a little more documentation on where
and how to set the configuration file and what it should contain
With the changes made, at the end I went for bumping the version number to
We might want to use the same version in the CLI as in the server. We won't be
able to import __version__ from the server as the CLI is independant from the
server, so we'll have to do this by hand.
Hope this helps,
[PATCH 1/5] Fix parsing the copr_url from the configuration file
[PATCH 2/5] Rework the layout of the list command
[PATCH 3/5] Add a man page for copr-cli
[PATCH 4/5] Refer to the man page for more information about the
[PATCH 5/5] Bump the copr-cli release to 0.2.0 with all the changes
I tried to add rhel7-beta chroot to copr, but it simply does not work right now:
If somebody manage to build package using mock using published rhel7-beta ftp, please let me know.
Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS
Red Hat, Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
I upgraded production version of Copr, I found some problems (despite
previously testing that code on staging machine). I resolved some
issues, but one problem remains: if project have more then one chroot,
package is build only in one chroot and rest is waiting in pending state
If you find some other problem, please let me know.
I will continue in investigation tomorrow.
Red Hat Satellite Engineering
On 12/02/2013 05:39 PM, rmarko(a)fedoraproject.org wrote:
> Repository : http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/copr.git
> On branch : master
> commit 683b37b7e1875bd21332f4a6d685cfa0936dde51
> Author: Richard Marko <rmarko(a)fedoraproject.org>
> Date: Mon Dec 2 16:32:31 2013 +0100
> [frontend] add build status to API
> Signed-off-by: Richard Marko <rmarko(a)fedoraproject.org>
Great. But can I kindly ask you to document this call on /api/ page?
It must be done manually (I'know, it is PITA). Generating documentation
of API from code is on the TODO list.