Carl,
it looks like this will not be included in centos stream per RH. so
looks like option 2 or 3 would be next right? to help the greater
community 3 might be better since other agents are missing too.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2098360
On 2022-06-17 16:28, Carl George wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 8:31 AM Alex Talaran <atalaran(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> would anyone be willing to package this in epel or help get it in the
>> existing package please?
>>
>> i asked on bugzilla [1] but the current maintainer isnt able to help at
>> the moment. from what i can tell it might just need uncommented in the
>> spec file [2]. someone else asked about it [1][3] and the ownership is
>> being thrown back and forth between epel and rhel.
>>
>>
>> [1]
>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029251
>>
>> [2]
>>
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/fence-agents/blob/main/fence-agents.spec.i...
>>
>> [3]
>>
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/fence-agents/issues/456
>> _______________________________________________
>> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave(a)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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproj...
>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
> In Fedora fence-agents-pve is a subpackage of fence-agents.
> fence-agents is in RHEL, so the Fedora package cannot be branched
> as-is for EPEL. Some possible alternatives:
>
> - Open a CentOS Stream bugzilla and request that fence-agents-pve be
> added to the fence-agents spec file. If the maintainer agrees, it
> will show up in the next RHEL minor release ("next" being contingent
> on timing). This is the ideal solution from a packaging perspective
> but has a fair chance of being declined if RHEL doesn't want to
> ship/support that subpackage.
> - Create a stand-alone fence-agents-pve package, and get it reviewed
> as an EPEL-only package. That would be allowed in EPEL because
> neither the srpm or rpm name would conflict with RHEL.
> - Create a fence-agents-epel package that contains all the subpackages
> that are disabled in the RHEL spec file. Similar to the previous
> option, this would be EPEL-only and would be allowed because the srpm
> and rpm names don't conflict with RHEL.
> - Rebuild the Fedora spec file with all subpackages somewhere where
> replacing base packages is allowed, such as a copr or a CentOS SIG.
>