Hi all,
A month or so ago I posted to this list and asked a few questions about EPEL, RHX, and Fedora proper. I was trying to understand the repository structure and how things fit together. If you are interested in reading the discussion you can find it below: https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2008-January/msg00094.html
The basic problem we discussed is that Zenoss requires Python 2.4, and since FC8 (and above) use Python 2.5 we elected to ship our own Python installation alongside our application. The recommended practice you all suggested was to rely on the compat-python24 package to provide / usr/bin/python2.4 and use that instead.
I wanted to bring you all up to date with our efforts. We've moved ahead with your suggestion and have assembled a binary FC8 RPM (i386 and x86_64) that depends on compat-python24. I can provide our .spec and .tar.gz file, or I can provide a .src.rpm.
What is the next logical step in the progression towards our inclusion in the EPEL repository? We're very excited about becoming official members of your community and would like to know what we need to do to be included in your group.
-c
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:15:40 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
What is the next logical step in the progression towards our inclusion in the EPEL repository? We're very excited about becoming official members of your community and would like to know what we need to do to be included in your group.
Honestly I would work on an EPEL4 (RHEL4) set of specs, that use the RHEL4 provided python-2.3. I don't think anything that requires python-2.4 will be allowed in the EPEL5 repo.
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:15:40 -0500
Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
What is the next logical step in the progression towards our inclusion in the EPEL repository? We're very excited about becoming official members of your community and would like to know what we need to do to be included in your group.
Honestly I would work on an EPEL4 (RHEL4) set of specs, that use the RHEL4 provided python-2.3. I don't think anything that requires python-2.4 will be allowed in the EPEL5 repo.
RHEL5 has python-2.4 so it will be perfectly fine there.
Dennis
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:28:32 -0600 Dennis Gilmore dennis@ausil.us wrote:
RHEL5 has python-2.4 so it will be perfectly fine there.
Oops, I was confused at first as to why the F8 package was involved at all if they're trying to get into RHEL. Not sure where my mind was.
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:15:40 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
What is the next logical step in the progression towards our inclusion in the EPEL repository? We're very excited about becoming official members of your community and would like to know what we need to do to be included in your group.
Honestly I would work on an EPEL4 (RHEL4) set of specs, that use the RHEL4 provided python-2.3. I don't think anything that requires python-2.4 will be allowed in the EPEL5 repo.
Hmm? Something went wrong here, Jesse, and I can't figure out what it is you meant to say.
Kind regards,
Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:33:24 +0100 Jeroen van Meeuwen kanarip@kanarip.com wrote:
Hmm? Something went wrong here, Jesse, and I can't figure out what it is you meant to say.
Don't worry, I went a little crazy for a few minutes. Disregard that post all together.
Christopher Blunck wrote:
Hi all,
A month or so ago I posted to this list and asked a few questions about EPEL, RHX, and Fedora proper. I was trying to understand the repository structure and how things fit together. If you are interested in reading the discussion you can find it below:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2008-January/msg00094.html
The basic problem we discussed is that Zenoss requires Python 2.4, and since FC8 (and above) use Python 2.5 we elected to ship our own Python installation alongside our application. The recommended practice you all suggested was to rely on the compat-python24 package to provide /usr/bin/python2.4 and use that instead.
I wanted to bring you all up to date with our efforts. We've moved ahead with your suggestion and have assembled a binary FC8 RPM (i386 and x86_64) that depends on compat-python24. I can provide our .spec and .tar.gz file, or I can provide a .src.rpm.
What is the next logical step in the progression towards our inclusion in the EPEL repository? We're very excited about becoming official members of your community and would like to know what we need to do to be included in your group.
Assuming you are interested in maintaining the software package on a continuous basis within EPEL, refer
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#head-0ea98f661aff25e65d3781c334473985...
If you need help, feel free to ask here or in #epel IRC channel in freenode.
Rahul
On Feb 28, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher Blunck wrote: Assuming you are interested in maintaining the software package on a continuous basis within EPEL, refer
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#head-0ea98f661aff25e65d3781c334473985...
The Zenoss Dev Team will be responsible for maintaining the software package. They will most likely ask me to be the individual responsible for doing the work, but as a collective we will make sure that it is maintained on a continuous basis.
-c
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Christopher Blunck wrote:
On Feb 28, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher Blunck wrote: Assuming you are interested in maintaining the software package on a continuous basis within EPEL, refer
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#head-0ea98f661aff25e65d3781c334473985...
The Zenoss Dev Team will be responsible for maintaining the software package. They will most likely ask me to be the individual responsible for doing the work, but as a collective we will make sure that it is maintained on a continuous basis.
To be clear, I suspect many people are interested in getting this package into epel. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns (like missing deps for example)
-Mike
We're extremely interested in making it into EPEL. The biggest hurdle we face right now is not a technical one; it's a policy/procedure problem. Simply put: we (or more specifically I) am unfamiliar with the EPEL/Fedora/RHEL policies and procedures that are used to qualify a project to be included into your baseline.
I'm trying to make sure that we conform to your policies and procedures, and that we follow all of the guidelines the community offers as criteria for inclusion into the repository. Sometimes those policies conflict with our existing build system (e.g. the situation with python 2.4). When that comes up we (I) try to re-engineer our build-system to accommodate your criteria because honestly your procedures are usually best practices. :)
Tomorrow I'm going to submit our .spec and .src.rpm for review. I expect that as a result of that submission we'll have an opportunity to work through some more of details associated with being included into the repository.
Thanks guys for all your help! Please give us a chance - we're just trying to understand what we need to do to be included in your repo! :)
-c
On Feb 28, 2008, at 10:14 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Christopher Blunck wrote:
On Feb 28, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher Blunck wrote: Assuming you are interested in maintaining the software package on a continuous basis within EPEL, refer
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#head-0ea98f661aff25e65d3781c334473985...
The Zenoss Dev Team will be responsible for maintaining the software package. They will most likely ask me to be the individual responsible for doing the work, but as a collective we will make sure that it is maintained on a continuous basis.
To be clear, I suspect many people are interested in getting this package into epel. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns (like missing deps for example)
-Mike
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
Christopher Blunck wrote:
We're extremely interested in making it into EPEL. The biggest hurdle we face right now is not a technical one; it's a policy/procedure problem. Simply put: we (or more specifically I) am unfamiliar with the EPEL/Fedora/RHEL policies and procedures that are used to qualify a project to be included into your baseline.
I'm trying to make sure that we conform to your policies and procedures, and that we follow all of the guidelines the community offers as criteria for inclusion into the repository. Sometimes those policies conflict with our existing build system (e.g. the situation with python 2.4). When that comes up we (I) try to re-engineer our build-system to accommodate your criteria because honestly your procedures are usually best practices. :)
Tomorrow I'm going to submit our .spec and .src.rpm for review. I expect that as a result of that submission we'll have an opportunity to work through some more of details associated with being included into the repository.
Thanks guys for all your help! Please give us a chance - we're just trying to understand what we need to do to be included in your repo! :)
I think I figured out the Python issue - the general way something gets into EPEL is through Fedora review process first - and since Python 2.4 is not shipped in a supported release of Fedora, that may be difficult.
Is that what the deal is?
Does EPEL have a second path in for these scenarios?
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:52:22PM -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote:
I think I figured out the Python issue - the general way something gets into EPEL is through Fedora review process first - and since Python 2.4 is not shipped in a supported release of Fedora, that may be difficult.
Is that what the deal is?
Does EPEL have a second path in for these scenarios?
I have submitted tetex-lineno for EPEL-4 only. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426929
It was a regular submission. After it was accepted, the devel branch was closed with a dead.package because this is allready in more recent distributions. In the case of zenoss, this shouldn't be done, since it is possible that future versions also work on fedora. In my opinion, th edevel branch should just not be built.
I fear that python2.4 compat packages won't be accepted in fedora, there was a discussion about it some time ago on fedora-devel-list.
http://www.mailinglistarchive.com/fedora-devel-list@redhat.com/msg21009.html
I personnally disagree on that kind of decisions of not trusting packagers and not helping with backward compatibility package and instead trying to block them, but that's how fedora currently is.
Looks like there is a compat2.4 python on livna, however.
-- Pat
Michael A. Peters wrote:
I think I figured out the Python issue - the general way something gets into EPEL is through Fedora review process first - and since Python 2.4 is not shipped in a supported release of Fedora, that may be difficult.
Is that what the deal is?
Does EPEL have a second path in for these scenarios?
Read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag (pay special attention to the "conditionals" part) and use it to differentiate among systems during build time. Just BuildRequire and use python-2.4 where it is available and python-compat-2.4 in the rest.
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:19:04AM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
I think I figured out the Python issue - the general way something gets into EPEL is through Fedora review process first - and since Python 2.4 is not shipped in a supported release of Fedora, that may be difficult.
Is that what the deal is?
Does EPEL have a second path in for these scenarios?
Read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag (pay special attention to the "conditionals" part) and use it to differentiate among systems during build time. Just BuildRequire and use python-2.4 where it is available and python-compat-2.4 in the rest.
Is there a python-compat-2.4 somewhere in fedora and RHEL?
-- Pat
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:22:57 +0100 Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr wrote:
Is there a python-compat-2.4 somewhere in fedora and RHEL?
Not needed in RHEL.
2008/2/29 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:22:57 +0100 Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr wrote:
Is there a python-compat-2.4 somewhere in fedora and RHEL?
Not needed in RHEL.
Well it would be needed in RHEL-4 as it is python-2.3.4. Anyway.. general question.. who do I need to talk to help get this going into EPEL?
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
Hi all,
A month or so ago I posted to this list and asked a few questions about EPEL, RHX, and Fedora proper. I was trying to understand the repository structure and how things fit together. If you are interested in reading the discussion you can find it below: https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2008-January/msg00094.html
The basic problem we discussed is that Zenoss requires Python 2.4, and since FC8 (and above) use Python 2.5 we elected to ship our own Python installation alongside our application. The recommended practice you all suggested was to rely on the compat-python24 package to provide / usr/bin/python2.4 and use that instead.
Ok, catching up with things.. sorry for my delay. It looks like we will want to follow the process laid out in the FAQ:
----- Is it possible to get a package only into EPEL and not Fedora?
Simply go through the review process for Fedora and specify only EL targets for the initial import. But note that maintaining packages in Fedora has many advantages for you, you should really consider maintaining the package in both Fedora and EPEL. -----
The review seems to be https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435470
Just the zenos or some of the ones that you say you patche?
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org