On 12/11/20 5:04 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 12/12/20 12:12 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> There is also a problem if a missing package has been specifically
> blocked by a module. I think libuv-devel is this way.
If that happens, wouldn't it be blocked in both scenarios
(module+grobisplitter+tagging and devel-only-component)? Or would
grobisplitter put them in an additional repo with module_hotfixes=yes?
If that's the case, it might be possible to create a separate repo with
such packages only and manually tag them there. E.g. after a build I'd
do `koji tag epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes foo-devel-1.6-5.el8` and
the epel8-buildroot-module-hotfixes repo would be available from EPEL 8
Koji/mock builds with module_hotfixes=yes. Yes, unlike the rest of this
proposal, it requires some work (on infra to set up this extra repo and
on packagers to remember to do the tagging, but that still sounds like
less work than the grobisplitter proposal for both groups).
Is there any easy way to tell if a package is explicitly blocked vs just
not being present.
> We discussed this in the EPEL Steering Committee this week, and
your
> way has alot less "mess with the server and modules" work.
> It would probably get us up to 75% of the missing packages.
>
> If people who have been waiting for packages want to give this a try
> and show what they did for others to follow, that would be great.
> I'll probrubly do it for some of the packages I want. And see what
> type of scripts, patches, and other things are needed.
Let me know if you have a devel package in mind and I can give it a try.
Can we just jump in and try this out? I'd like to get qpdf-devel
available. If so, I guess I would do:
fedpkg request-repo --exception qpdf-devel
right?
--
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301
https://www.nwra.com/