3:13 p.m.
Hi
Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
eigen3 mingw-eigen3
enchant2 mingw-enchant2
freeimage mingw-freeimage
gdal mingw-gdal
GeographicLib mingw-GeographicLib
geos mingw-geos
giflib mingw-giflib
gtkspell3 mingw-gtkspell3
gtkspellmm30 mingw-gtkspellmm30
jxrlib mingw-jxrlib
leptonica mingw-leptonica
libgeotiff mingw-libgeotiff
libimagequant mingw-libimagequant
libkml mingw-libkml
librttopo mingw-librttopo
libspatialite mingw-libspatialite
libwebp mingw-libwebp
openjpeg2 mingw-openjpeg2
OpenSceneGraph mingw-OpenSceneGraph
osgearth mingw-osgearth
podofo mingw-podofo
proj mingw-proj
python-pillow mingw-python-pillow
qtspell mingw-qtspell
shapelib mingw-shapelib
svg2svgt mingw-svg2svgt
tesseract mingw-tesseract
uriparser mingw-uriparser
I'm performing test builds here [1]. Once I've got them all building
there, if there are no objections, I plan to push to F37 and retire all
the corresponding mingw repos.
Sandro
[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/mingw-unified-spec/builds/
8:02 a.m.
On 2/20/22 3:13 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden,
I'm planning to
start merging native and mingw packages.
What do you feel about native packages depending on MinGW packages?
Upstream wine has begun to depend on .dll files. Wine 7.3 bundles vkd3d[1][2], but
will also look for it if provided with a location for the .dll files. Currently,
Wine 7.2 and lower look for the native vkd3d files.
[1] https://source.winehq.org/git/vkd3d.git/
[2] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/vkd3d
12:55 p.m.
On 14.03.22 14:02, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 2/20/22 3:13 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden,
> I'm planning to start merging native and mingw packages.
What do you feel about native packages depending on MinGW packages?
As far as I can judge, I don't see any problem.
Sandro
8:06 a.m.
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
Thanks for driving this idea forward, I think it'll be very good for
maintainers in the long run.
I'm performing test builds here [1]. Once I've got them all building there,
if there are no objections, I plan to push to F37 and retire all the
corresponding mingw repos.
Sandro
[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/mingw-unified-spec/builds/
Seems to be a 404 - is it marked private perhaps ?
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
8:13 a.m.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 01:06:34PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi
>
> Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
> looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
Thanks for driving this idea forward, I think it'll be very good for
maintainers in the long run.
>
> I'm performing test builds here [1]. Once I've got them all building there,
> if there are no objections, I plan to push to F37 and retire all the
> corresponding mingw repos.
>
> Sandro
>
> [1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/mingw-unified-spec/builds/
Seems to be a 404 - is it marked private perhaps ?
Never mind, I was blinded by the other response into thinking this
was a new thread, where as the orignal mail was actually weeks old.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
12:56 p.m.
On 14.03.22 14:13, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 01:06:34PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
>> planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
>> looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
> Thanks for driving this idea forward, I think it'll be very good for
> maintainers in the long run.
>
>
>> I'm performing test builds here [1]. Once I've got them all building
there,
>> if there are no objections, I plan to push to F37 and retire all the
>> corresponding mingw repos.
>>
>> Sandro
>>
>> [1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/mingw-unified-spec/builds/
> Seems to be a 404 - is it marked private perhaps ?
Never mind, I was blinded by the other response into thinking this
was a new thread, where as the orignal mail was actually weeks old.
Right, I already went ahead and merged the work ;) So far I've not seen
any side-effects directly related to unifying the two builds.
Sandro
8:49 a.m.
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
I've done the same with all the mingw packages I maintained just
before Fedora 37 branched. So the following native packages now
just contain mingw sub-RPMs:
libvirt, libvirt-glib, libosinfo, osinfo-db, osinfo-db-tools, gtk-vnc
I'm so happy to have reduced this maint burden. I see a few new mingw
packages pending in package review and think it'd be nice to first ask
the native maintainer to consider unified package, before we approve
any new separate mingw packages.
Our Mingw packaging guidelines, however, exclusively describe fully
separated mingw packages. So if I suggest this to a native package
maintainer who is not already familiar with mingw, they would be
right to question whether this is a desirable thing.
IOW, I think we need to look at getting the mingw packaging docs
updated to promote unified packaging as an officially supported
(and even preferred) option, alongside separate packaging.
With regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
611
days inactive
796
days old
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Daniel P. Berrangé -
Michael Cronenworth -
Sandro Mani