7:10 a.m.
Hello, I have a question related to *python2-jenkins-job-builder *package,
who maintains this? currently available version in epel is pretty old and I
wonder if there any plans to update it to the recent version?
Or maybe there any issues with updating it, like incompatible changes or
something like that?
Thanks,
--
ROMAN IUVSHYN
Red Hat
<https://www.redhat.com/>
riuvshyn(a)redhat.com
<https://red.ht/sig>
10:36 a.m.
>>>> "RI" == Roman Iuvshyn
<riuvshyn(a)redhat.com> writes:
RI> I have a question related to *python2-jenkins-job-builder
RI> *package, who maintains this?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-jenkins-job-builder shows all
of the maintainers.
RI> currently available version in epel is pretty old and I wonder if
RI> there any plans to update it to the recent version?
Did you file a ticket requesting an update? I don't see one.
Maintainers are generally going to be very reluctant to update a package
in EPEL without some pressing need. Not generally as reluctant as Red Hat would
be for a package in RHEL7 proper but you would still need to ask.
- J<
11:07 a.m.
Hello,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 6:36 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu>
wrote:
>>>>> "RI" == Roman Iuvshyn
<riuvshyn(a)redhat.com> writes:
RI> I have a question related to *python2-jenkins-job-builder
RI> *package, who maintains this?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-jenkins-job-builder shows all
of the maintainers.
RI> currently available version in epel is pretty old and I wonder if
RI> there any plans to update it to the recent version?
Did you file a ticket requesting an update? I don't see one.
No i didn't yet, I was just wondering if there any reason why this still on
old version.
Maintainers are generally going to be very reluctant to update a package
in EPEL without some pressing need. Not generally as reluctant as Red Hat
would
be for a package in RHEL7 proper but you would still need to ask.
- J<
Ok, thanks for the info, I'll create a ticket for updating this.
--
ROMAN IUVSHYN
Red Hat
<https://www.redhat.com/>
riuvshyn(a)redhat.com
<https://red.ht/sig>
1:19 p.m.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>> "RI" == Roman Iuvshyn
<riuvshyn(a)redhat.com> writes:
Maintainers are generally going to be very reluctant to update a package
in EPEL without some pressing need. Not generally as reluctant as Red Hat would
be for a package in RHEL7 proper but you would still need to ask.
I've always thought it's the other way around, that EPEL moves faster
than RHEL, but you're making me think there's gotta be a story behind
this comment! :D
- Ken
3:07 p.m.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 6:10 AM, Roman Iuvshyn <riuvshyn(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hello, I have a question related to python2-jenkins-job-builder
package, who
maintains this? currently available version in epel is pretty old and I
wonder if there any plans to update it to the recent version?
Or maybe there any issues with updating it, like incompatible changes or
something like that?
I tried mock building for epel7 locally, and after s/python2-/python-/
on a couple dependencies, I found this issue:
No matching package to install: 'python-stevedore >= 1.17.1'
No matching package to install: 'python-jenkins >= 0.4.15'
So we'll need to upgrade those dependencies in EPEL 7 before we can
build and ship the jenkins-job-builder version in Rawhide (2.1.0).
- Ken
3:12 p.m.
On 18 July 2018 at 14:19, Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III
<tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> "RI" == Roman Iuvshyn <riuvshyn(a)redhat.com>
writes:
>
> Maintainers are generally going to be very reluctant to update a package
> in EPEL without some pressing need. Not generally as reluctant as Red Hat would
> be for a package in RHEL7 proper but you would still need to ask.
I've always thought it's the other way around, that EPEL moves faster
than RHEL, but you're making me think there's gotta be a story behind
this comment! :D
Originally EPEL was built to be lock step with RHEL. At the time of
RHEL-4/5 this meant that you were to only put in what is now called
Long Term Support software which would not get updated for the 4 to 5
year lifetime of the release. So various documentation is set up to
say that you are going to generally not update items unless there is
no other way to do so.
Several things have changed since then.
1. RHEL releases are no longer around for just 5 years but 10-12.
2. RHEL rebases itself more often so that it is following upstreams
for various components it kept 'stable' before.
3. Software that is used by most sites have completely different
lifetimes and architectures than they did then. Where the idea behind
EPEL was about compiled binaries which could sit steady.. most users
are needing things from diverse ecosystems that consider 3 months to
be too long to support at times.
So EPEL ends up being a mixed bag.. there are parts which do not get
updated and only move slowly and there are parts which move faster
than RHEL.. and it is up to the maintainer of a package or set of to
come up with what they feel works for them./
- Ken
_______________________________________________
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproj...
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
3:29 p.m.
>>>> "KD" == Ken Dreyer
<ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com> writes:
KD> I've always thought it's the other way around, that EPEL moves
KD> faster than RHEL,
Well, what I said didn't contradict that, so... I guess I don't
understand what you're trying to say.
I said that EPEL maintainers aren't generally as reluctant as Red Hat
would be to update something. So they are more likely to update than
Red Hat would. Which implies that EPEL moves faster than RHEL.
- J<
4:08 p.m.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>> "KD" == Ken Dreyer
<ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com> writes:
KD> I've always thought it's the other way around, that EPEL moves
KD> faster than RHEL,
Well, what I said didn't contradict that, so... I guess I don't
understand what you're trying to say.
I said that EPEL maintainers aren't generally as reluctant as Red Hat
would be to update something. So they are more likely to update than
Red Hat would. Which implies that EPEL moves faster than RHEL.
My bad Jason, I got mixed up when I read your earlier comment there. I
see now we're in agreement.
- Ken
2113
days inactive
2113
days old
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Ken Dreyer -
Roman Iuvshyn -
Stephen John Smoogen