For a while now https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/ has been reporting Service Unavailable The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Has this packages site been retired or does a server just need a boot? :)
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:27:15AM -0000, Phil Clayton wrote:
For a while now https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/ has been reporting Service Unavailable The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later. Has this packages site been retired or does a server just need a boot? :)
This site was retired. It's not quite as user-friendly, but see:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/projects/rpms/*
for package sources.
Thanks for the new link.
It may be worth fixing the link from https://apps.fedoraproject.org/#Packages which is still alive, although many packaging links from that page seem to be broken, so possibly that page is no longer maintained.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 11:41:42PM -0000, Phil Clayton wrote:
Thanks for the new link.
It may be worth fixing the link from https://apps.fedoraproject.org/#Packages which is still alive, although many packaging links from that page seem to be broken, so possibly that page is no longer maintained.
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
kevin
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to deploy?
If that will be the fedora-packages-ng I will be happy to proceed and spin up VM in AWS and update playbooks. I just need the green light :) If that helps, I can promise that CPT (aka Copr) team will maintain it.
On 11/24/20 5:18 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to deploy?
Timothée and I submitted a solution in April. It would be great if packages-static could be adopted.
I have been consistently responding to all discussions on the mailing list. I did respond to the thread back in September. Kevin said you were busy and suggested -static and -ng be tested. I have submitted an RFR since then. I have time to maintain packages-static and I am still looking for a favorable decision.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 12:18:54PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to deploy?
Well, I personally thought it would be better to go with the community maintained one. Less work for you/your team, more respectfull of the work they already put into this, and I know you and your team are busy.
If that will be the fedora-packages-ng I will be happy to proceed and spin up VM in AWS and update playbooks. I just need the green light :) If that helps, I can promise that CPT (aka Copr) team will maintain it.
Thats great, and if that was the only choice I would be very happy... however, we have another community maintained/created one. :(
On 11/24/20 5:18 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to deploy?
Timothée and I submitted a solution in April. It would be great if packages-static could be adopted.
I have been consistently responding to all discussions on the mailing list. I did respond to the thread back in September. Kevin said you were busy and suggested -static and -ng be tested. I have submitted an RFR since then. I have time to maintain packages-static and I am still looking for a favorable decision.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
Yeah, I have had no time to work on deploying this, but it should be pretty short work for any of the folks who have deployed apps in our openshift.
I'd personally go with static, but perhaps thats just me.
I would love to hear from more feedback one way or another.
Miroslav: what do you think? would you be ok if we went with static and in the event something didn't work there or we needed more functionality down the road we could move to ng then and in the mean time less work for you?
Please chime in everyone. :)
kevin
I can't find anymore the links to the testing instances of the two apps. Can anyone re-post them here?
Thanks Mattia
On 11/25/20 12:00 PM, Mattia Verga wrote:
I can't find anymore the links to the testing instances of the two apps. Can anyone re-post them here?
I don't have testing instances, but it will look similar to this.
https://mymindstorm.fedorapeople.org/pkgs-demo/pkgs/numix-icon-theme-square/
You may want to look at this thread for more background.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 1:30 PM Brendan Early mymindstorm1@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/25/20 12:00 PM, Mattia Verga wrote:
I can't find anymore the links to the testing instances of the two apps. Can anyone re-post them here?
I don't have testing instances, but it will look similar to this.
https://mymindstorm.fedorapeople.org/pkgs-demo/pkgs/numix-icon-theme-square/
You may want to look at this thread for more background.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
My understanding is that the -static version cannot update at the same cadence as the content synced out to the mirrors. To me, that's a problem, because then the data is just too stale or wrong because it's not fresh enough.
The behavior of the -ng version is preferable to me, since the content will actually match what Fedora has continuously.
On 11/25/20 12:34 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
My understanding is that the -static version cannot update at the same cadence as the content synced out to the mirrors. To me, that's a problem, because then the data is just too stale or wrong because it's not fresh enough.
How often do the mirrors sync? I have been meaning to change the sync script to only generate files for version differences, which should allow for running it every thirty minutes.
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 20:26, Brendan Early mymindstorm1@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/25/20 12:34 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
My understanding is that the -static version cannot update at the same cadence as the content synced out to the mirrors. To me, that's a problem, because then the data is just too stale or wrong because it's not fresh enough.
How often do the mirrors sync? I have been meaning to change the sync script to only generate files for version differences, which should allow for running it every thirty minutes.
The previous solution was listening to this message https://apps.fedoraproject.org/datagrepper/raw?topic=org.fedoraproject.prod.... to update the database. The message is sent if changes are detected in the repos. That process is run by a cronjob every hour.
IMO that's acceptable, but curious to hear from others :-)
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@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/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:41:21PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 20:26, Brendan Early mymindstorm1@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/25/20 12:34 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
My understanding is that the -static version cannot update at the same cadence as the content synced out to the mirrors. To me, that's a problem, because then the data is just too stale or wrong because it's not fresh enough.
How often do the mirrors sync? I have been meaning to change the sync script to only generate files for version differences, which should allow for running it every thirty minutes.
The previous solution was listening to this message https://apps.fedoraproject.org/datagrepper/raw?topic=org.fedoraproject.prod.... to update the database. The message is sent if changes are detected in the repos. That process is run by a cronjob every hour.
IMO that's acceptable, but curious to hear from others :-)
Yeah, it depends on the thing:
* rawhide syncs once a day (or less when it fails to compose, or more when we run multiple composes a day) * branched (same as rawhide) * stable fedora branches/epel: once a day (unless asked to do more pushes for urgent security updates).
So, yeah, on those repos updating would be outstanding. (but not koji repos, just rawhide/branched/updates/updates-testing)
Every 30min would probibly be fine as well and catch most of the changes.
kevin
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 at 23:02, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 12:18:54PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to
deploy?
Well, I personally thought it would be better to go with the community maintained one. Less work for you/your team, more respectfull of the work they already put into this, and I know you and your team are busy.
If that will be the fedora-packages-ng I will be happy to proceed and
spin up VM in AWS and update playbooks. I just
need the green light :) If that helps, I can promise that CPT (aka Copr) team will maintain it.
Thats great, and if that was the only choice I would be very happy... however, we have another community maintained/created one. :(
On 11/24/20 5:18 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 20 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
We are close to replacing this app with a new setup...
see the 'packages app' thread in this very list. ;)
Did we come to conclusion which app (out of these two) we are going to
deploy?
Timothée and I submitted a solution in April. It would be great if packages-static could be adopted.
I have been consistently responding to all discussions on the mailing
list.
I did respond to the thread back in September. Kevin said you were busy
and
suggested -static and -ng be tested. I have submitted an RFR since then.
I
have time to maintain packages-static and I am still looking for a
favorable
decision.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
Yeah, I have had no time to work on deploying this, but it should be pretty short work for any of the folks who have deployed apps in our openshift.
I'd personally go with static, but perhaps thats just me.
Yeah I think we should give a chance to the static solution, which seems to be the easier to maintain and run on the long term.
I would love to hear from more feedback one way or another.
Miroslav: what do you think? would you be ok if we went with static and in the event something didn't work there or we needed more functionality down the road we could move to ng then and in the mean time less work for you?
Please chime in everyone. :)
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@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/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Brendan Early -
Clement Verna -
Kevin Fenzi -
Matthew Miller -
Mattia Verga -
Miroslav Suchý -
Neal Gompa -
Phil Clayton