On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:10 PM Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote:
> For rawhide, and branched (prerelease) yes, changes likely would need to > be there. > For updates its the infrastructure ansible repo. > Sigh. So, IMHO, tickets for this should be filed as releng tickets > and folks should note which they are talking about above. > Thanks, I'll try to remember that. > > However, as you can see, the maintainers don't respond much to such > requests :-( > > > Perhaps Mohan, Kevin or others could shed a light here how to best > make sure those requests are noticed? Thanks. > > releng ticket I would think, but can you expand on which requests aren't > noticed ? > Here's one: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/849 Here's a second one, but yesterday I found out that there was a related PR merged, so I updated it: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/811 A third one: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/501 > I expect it's valuable to have the logic for multilibs, "self > > contained" in the package instead of to rely on any infra tweaks. > > > > (1) https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/PackageKit/pull-request/7 > > Yeah, I would definitely prefer that. > Adding normal packages are requirements for a devel package just to make it multilib feels... unclean? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something. In order to have the logic self-contained, why don't we add something like "Provides: multilib(x86_64, i686)" into affected packages and make pungi process that?
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
