On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:29:26 +0200 Fabrice Salvaire <f.salvaire(a)genomicvision.com&gt; wrote: > Dear all, > > I upgraded the Zabbix package to the upstream version 2.0.2. It seems > to work fine, except I don't tested everything. > > Thus I have the SRPM with the update for the spec file and some of > the sources files. How can I provide it to EPEL ? File a bug against the epel Zabbix package and the maintainer can review and apply your patches.

On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 12:36 -0500, Greg Swift wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:29:26 +0200 > > Fabrice Salvaire <f.salvaire(a)genomicvision.com&gt; wrote: > > > >> Dear all, > >> > >> I upgraded the Zabbix package to the upstream version 2.0.2. It seems > >> to work fine, except I don't tested everything. > >> > >> Thus I have the SRPM with the update for the spec file and some of > >> the sources files. How can I provide it to EPEL ? > > > > File a bug against the epel Zabbix package and the maintainer can > > review and apply your patches. > > its actually a touch more complex to that unless things have changed. > The EPEL guidelines [1] state that major version updates are to be > avoided with a goal of 'yum update' just working. I recently joined Dan Horak (sharkcz) in the work towards a 2.0 package for Fedora and EPEL. It's pretty complex indeed. We're switching to two users to keep agent and proxy/server isolated better. We also switched to Debian Alternatives to choose between database implementations and have no conflicting sub-packages. The draft is suitable for systemd and init scripts -- having all necessary conditionals in place and hopefully ending the existence of 4 different branches. I published a draft. I hope Dan can take a look at it soon. Anybody's comment is highly appreciated. http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix20-2.0.2-3.el6.src.rpm http://www.geofrogger.net/review/z2/zabbix.Fedora is a README, that will become part of the package. > I'm not sure how > big of a difference 1.8 -> 2.0, but 1.6 -> 1.8 was different enough. > Currently EPEL5 has 1.6 release of zabbix and EPEL6 has 1.8 release. > This has been talked about several times on list and I don't know that > anyone came up with a good resolution. You definitely need to run a database upgrade. Since proxies and servers must run the same major version, it'd be a good idea to also have it in EPEL 5. > > One of the options was to change the package name and host both > releases in EPEL. I'm not sure how often this actually happens, or > what the path to get there would be. That's the approach we took. zabbix20 conflicts with zabbix. Zabbix has a good stable-policy, so relevant changes would only appear on major x.y releases. They're aiming for regular major releases every 9 months from now on.

Dear all, On 25/09/12 18:37, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:29:26 +0200 > Fabrice Salvaire&lt;f.salvaire(a)genomicvision.com&gt; wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> I upgraded the Zabbix package to the upstream version 2.0.2. It seems >> to work fine, except I don't tested everything. >> >> Thus I have the SRPM with the update for the spec file and some of >> the sources files. How can I provide it to EPEL ? > > > File a bug against the epel Zabbix package and the maintainer can > review and apply your patches. > If I am right the EPEL devel list archive is not searchable and there is no "public container" to put such works: a way to find experimental SRPM for a package, a kind of github infrastructure with a wiki and branches. The SRPM of Greg Swift is certainly much better than my quick upgrade of the 1.8 package, my own is just a RPM version of no more than a personal compilation in order to deploy the agent easily. But how to be aware of it?