Dne 17. 05. 21 v 11:56 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:01:39AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17. 05. 21 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:53 AM Vít Ondruch
wrote:
...
Maintaining a
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:01:39AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 17. 05. 21 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> >
> >Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
> >>On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:53 AM Vít Ondruch
> >> wrote:
> >>...
> Maintaining a separate branch for ELN requires us to
Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:29 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
In nearly all cases, we want the `rawhide` branch in dist-git to
provide the sources used to build packages for ELN. This ensures that
they are kept up to date and minimizes packager effort (since they do
not have to maintain an extra branch).
Dne 17. 05. 21 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:53 AM Vít Ondruch
wrote:
...
Maintaining a separate branch for ELN requires us to do the
following things:
* Create an `eln` branch for the package
* Exclude the pac
Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:53 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
...
Maintaining a separate branch for ELN requires us to do the following things:
* Create an `eln` branch for the package
* Exclude the package from the Rawhide auto-rebuild
This is not n
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 5:01 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 02:57:14PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 06:38:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > I wouldn't say so. I'd say "package both versions as separate
> > > non-modular RPM package
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 02:57:14PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 06:38:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > I wouldn't say so. I'd say "package both versions as separate
> > non-modular RPM packages with unique names" is the general answer
> > when different versions of the
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 06:38:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> I wouldn't say so. I'd say "package both versions as separate
> non-modular RPM packages with unique names" is the general answer
> when different versions of the package are desired.
>
> However, the problem here is different. We don
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 1:01 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 14. 05. 21 16:29, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > * Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
> > to stay on LTS releases (e.g. Firefox)
>
> About this use case:
>
> Is ELN still consumed as an "add-on repo" for Raw
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:54 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
...
> > Of course, this time around we were also rushing to get the
> > infrastructure in place for CentOS Stream 9, which will already be
> > available for EL 10... so maybe the answer here is to just go directly
> > from ELN into CentOS Stream
On 14. 05. 21 16:29, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
* Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
to stay on LTS releases (e.g. Firefox)
About this use case:
Is ELN still consumed as an "add-on repo" for Rawhide, or that is no
longer true? Becasue if it is still the case, t
On 14. 05. 21 17:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:05 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
...
First of all: Thanks. This is what many of us wanted from the beginning
of ELN and this will allow us to crop many of our unwanted dependencies
for RHEL 10+, already in ELN.
An automation tha
On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 12:28, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:01 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Matthew Miller
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:29:11AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > > * Fedora wants to use the latest
On 14. 05. 21 17:25, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:21:26AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Can we provide these things as modules and make them available in both?
Firefox LTS seems like an ideal candidate, and I can see someone on Fedora
Linux wanting the option and if the ELN
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:01 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:29:11AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > * Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
> > > to stay on LTS releases (e.
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:29:11AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > * Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
> > to stay on LTS releases (e.g. Firefox)
>
> Can we provide these things as modules and make th
On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 11:25, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:21:26AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > Can we provide these things as modules and make them available in both?
> > > Firefox LTS seems like an ideal candidate, and I can see someone on
> Fedora
> > > Linux wan
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:25 AM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:21:26AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > Can we provide these things as modules and make them available in both?
> > > Firefox LTS seems like an ideal candidate, and I can see someone on Fedora
> > > Linux w
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:18 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 14. 05. 21 16:58, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Oh, I absolutely understand that this will lead to dependency
> > trimming. However, such things are*also* possible via
> > conditionalizing the Rawhide specfile (which remains the recommend
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:21:26AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Can we provide these things as modules and make them available in both?
> > Firefox LTS seems like an ideal candidate, and I can see someone on Fedora
> > Linux wanting the option and if the ELN folks are maintaining a package
>
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:16 AM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:29:11AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > * Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
> > to stay on LTS releases (e.g. Firefox)
>
> Can we provide these things as modules and make th
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:05 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
...
> First of all: Thanks. This is what many of us wanted from the beginning
> of ELN and this will allow us to crop many of our unwanted dependencies
> for RHEL 10+, already in ELN.
>
> An automation that cherry-picks (rather than merges) Rawh
On 14. 05. 21 16:58, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Oh, I absolutely understand that this will lead to dependency
trimming. However, such things are*also* possible via
conditionalizing the Rawhide specfile (which remains the recommended
approach, because it means you don't have to maintain a separate
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:29:11AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> * Fedora wants to use the latest version of an upstream, but ELN wants
> to stay on LTS releases (e.g. Firefox)
Can we provide these things as modules and make them available in both?
Firefox LTS seems like an ideal candidate, an
On 14. 05. 21 16:29, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
In nearly all cases, we want the `rawhide` branch in dist-git to
provide the sources used to build packages for ELN. This ensures that
they are kept up to date and minimizes packager effort (since they do
not have to maintain an extra branch).
Howeve
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:53 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
...
> > Maintaining a separate branch for ELN requires us to do the following
> > things:
> > * Create an `eln` branch for the package
> > * Exclude the package from the Rawhide auto-rebuild
>
>
> This is not necessary as long as `git pull --reb
Dne 14. 05. 21 v 16:29 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
In nearly all cases, we want the `rawhide` branch in dist-git to
provide the sources used to build packages for ELN. This ensures that
they are kept up to date and minimizes packager effort (since they do
not have to maintain an extra branch).
27 matches
Mail list logo
