On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 01:53:03AM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
Hello everyone,
I've finally managed to find some time and get the latest Open Babel
snapshot to build in F32 and rawhide. The spec file is ugly with a
bunch of comments still in it and I've realized that documentation
upstream is lacking, especially concerning build options and bindings.
So far, I've enabled only the python bindings and I'm not sure what
else is still available. There's also an icon file missing, but that's
the least of our problems.
If anyone's interested in taking a look, here's a scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=52775710
I've also set up a copr, where things are still building, though eln
builds died almost instantly on all arches and the F32 armhfp builder
ran out of space:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/alexpl/openbabel/
Going forward, there's a number of things we need to figure out, off
the top of my head:
- I suppose I could take over from Dominik (with the hope that not
many things will break down in the following year) the packages in
Fedora, but not EPEL and friends. Who wants to do that?
- Has any of the maintainers of dependent packages that are dead-ish
upstream looked at porting them to OB 3?
- Do we create a new package, openbabel3, or do we rename the existing
one openbabel2? How do we deal with the complications of having both
of them around, especially since most of the binaries have the same
name?
There were many more things in my head when I started writing this
message, but they've somehow evaporated. I'm off to bed, please feel
free to chime in.
I think it makes sense to add a new 'openbabel3' package. Like Kevin wrote
in the other mail, it seems likely that some packages will depend on
the old version for the foreseeable future. Python recently switched
to a theme where it the "main" package has a number in the version [1].
This works nicely when there are multiple incompatible versions...
(One alternative would be to rename openbabel→openbabel2, and use
openbabel for the new version. But this requires an extra rename
operation and potentially adjustments in all dependent packages. Seems
like a lot of busywork, with potential for blocking if some dependent
package FTBFS.)
How do we deal with the complications of having both
of them around, especially since most of the binaries have the same
name?
Explicit Conflicts? Unless there's a strong need to install packages
in parallel, that seems like the easiest option.
Zbyszek
[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3.9