On 11/03/2013 06:31 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 10:14:20AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Le 01/11/2013 21:13, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
>> releng issues aside, the goal is to have one package for all scl
>> versions and one package for the mainstream version.
> Just to understand correctly, what is the tooling issue ?
Dennis has a bunch of potential issues floating around in his brain. At the
last meeting we pretty much decided that he'll need time to look at what
will happen if we try to do this in our staging environment. He won't have
time to do that until after F20 is out and he won't have time in the F21
timeframe unless we make the F21 schedule longer. He wanted to take a stab
at estimating how much time it would take before asking fesco if we could
increase the schedule more.
> If this is about NEVR must being unique, we should have as much
> package as SCL.
> I means
> python-foo (mainstream)
> Else (1 package for all scl) we're going to have the same NVER issue.
Yeah, that kinda approximates what I termed the fallback case in my email.
One git-repo-package per scl+package. The normal fedora branches inside of there.
Dennis says that will definitely work. I think we all agreed that that our
goal should be something better than that but we may end up having to suffer
through a release or two with that until we can get something better figured
packaging mailing list
I asked on internal mailing list. It looks like every project used a new
branch for packages, not new dist-git. Specfiles are different, but
there a new branch for it. The main reason was cherrypicking patches
from other branches.
How to setup koji for scls:
I didn't hear about any specific issues, so I can't tell if there are
other problems or not.