Hi all
I'm eager to start testing sway 1.0 (with as many of the supporting packages as possible) on f29 and f30. Does anyone have a copr repo (or similar) which is up to date? There's a bit of a jungle of different copr repos right now with a bunch being forked from eachother and few, if any, have any recent builds going. I could of course do some testing in rawhide but that limits my ability to do real life testing since I'm not eager to run rawhide as a daily driver.
Do we (as in anyone here) have a clear view of what remains before testing on f29 and f30 can begin in a broader sense?
Br Markus
Hello,
Do we (as in anyone here) have a clear view of what remains before testing on f29 and f30 can begin in a broader sense?
I don't think we should update sway in F29 since 1.0 is a major release with potential breaking changes. I believe we should either:
* Use modularity to provide a Sway 1.0 module for F29(+F30?) * Maintain (as a SIG) some kind of "official" copr repository for F29(+F30?)
Does anyone has an opinion on the subject? It would also be nice to post an article on the magazine once Sway 1.0 is officialy available in Fedora :-)
Cheers,
Hi
On March 31, 2019 1:59:57 PM GMT+02:00, "Timothée Floure" timothee.floure@fnux.ch wrote:
Hello,
Do we (as in anyone here) have a clear view of what remains before
testing on
f29 and f30 can begin in a broader sense?
I don't think we should update sway in F29 since 1.0 is a major release with potential breaking changes. I believe we should either:
- Use modularity to provide a Sway 1.0 module for F29(+F30?)
This would be the way to do it if targeting F29 and F30 (imho of course) and I think this needs to be done. F29 and F30 will be around for a while and I think it would be a disservice to leave users at 0.15.
- Maintain (as a SIG) some kind of "official" copr repository for
F29(+F30?)
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have served it's purpose though
Does anyone has an opinion on the subject? It would also be nice to post an article on the magazine once Sway 1.0 is officialy available in Fedora :-)
Cheers,
Br M
Hi Markus!
On 31. 03. 19 14:11, qrsBRWN wrote:
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have served it's purpose though
From my experience, creating module is rather time consuming, and I have not yet wrapped my head around it properly. Although it is the correct way forward to have it shipped in Fedora, for quick'n'dirty packages for testing purposes COPR may be better.
If you are willing to create/maintain one, we could probably declare it the "official Sway SIG COPR", with a disclaimer "for testing purposes only" and a link to the module/installation instructions once they are ready.
Thoughts?
Have a nice day, Jan
Jan Staněk jstanek@redhat.com writes:
Hi Markus!
On 31. 03. 19 14:11, qrsBRWN wrote:
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have served it's purpose though
From my experience, creating module is rather time consuming, and I have not yet wrapped my head around it properly. Although it is the correct way forward to have it shipped in Fedora, for quick'n'dirty packages for testing purposes COPR may be better.
If you are willing to create/maintain one, we could probably declare it the "official Sway SIG COPR", with a disclaimer "for testing purposes only" and a link to the module/installation instructions once they are ready.
Thoughts?
Sounds like a good idea, as I too have absolutely zero experience with modules (albeit they'd be the perfect solution for shipping sway to older Fedoras).
Cheers,
Dan
Have a nice day, Jan -- Jan Staněk Associate Software Engineer, Core Services Red Hat Czech jstanek@redhat.com IM: jstanek
Sway mailing list -- sway@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to sway-leave@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/sway@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi
On April 1, 2019 1:19:58 PM GMT+02:00, "Jan Staněk" jstanek@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Markus!
On 31. 03. 19 14:11, qrsBRWN wrote:
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have served
it's purpose though
From my experience, creating module is rather time consuming, and I have not yet wrapped my head around it properly. Although it is the correct way forward to have it shipped in Fedora, for quick'n'dirty packages for testing purposes COPR may be better.
Yeah modules is uncharted territory for me too. I'm thinking along to lines that to get to a module we at least need a COPR for testing. I will have to be pretty much a permanent fixture so there's no question about where to get the correct version of the handful of packages that needs to be tested together.
If you are willing to create/maintain one, we could probably declare it the "official Sway SIG COPR", with a disclaimer "for testing purposes only" and a link to the module/installation instructions once they are ready.
While I am eager to do my part in getting sway 1.0 into Fedora I also have 3 kids which makes my time unreliable. Getting time to test and bug report is much easier since I can run sway as my daily driver and weave testing into my ordinary work days. That said, if we can't find a more suitable candidate that has a more predictable time output (aka fewer or older kids) I guess it kinda defaults to me.
Thoughts?
Have a nice day, Jan
A quick heads up. I spent a little time getting aquatinted with copr and think I have figured out the basics. I'll have a look tomorrow to see if I can things closer to actually building on f29 and f30.
On April 1, 2019 3:07:56 PM GMT+02:00, qrsBRWN qrsbrwn@uidzero.se wrote:
Hi
On April 1, 2019 1:19:58 PM GMT+02:00, "Jan Staněk" jstanek@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Markus!
On 31. 03. 19 14:11, qrsBRWN wrote:
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have
served
it's purpose though
From my experience, creating module is rather time consuming, and I have not yet wrapped my head around it properly. Although it is the correct way forward to have it shipped in Fedora, for quick'n'dirty packages for testing purposes COPR may be better.
Yeah modules is uncharted territory for me too. I'm thinking along to lines that to get to a module we at least need a COPR for testing. I will have to be pretty much a permanent fixture so there's no question about where to get the correct version of the handful of packages that needs to be tested together.
If you are willing to create/maintain one, we could probably declare
it
the "official Sway SIG COPR", with a disclaimer "for testing purposes only" and a link to the module/installation instructions once they are ready.
While I am eager to do my part in getting sway 1.0 into Fedora I also have 3 kids which makes my time unreliable. Getting time to test and bug report is much easier since I can run sway as my daily driver and weave testing into my ordinary work days. That said, if we can't find a more suitable candidate that has a more predictable time output (aka fewer or older kids) I guess it kinda defaults to me.
Thoughts?
Have a nice day, Jan
Sway mailing list -- sway@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to sway-leave@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/sway@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 4/1/19 11:40 PM, qrsBRWN wrote:
A quick heads up. I spent a little time getting aquatinted with copr and think I have figured out the basics. I'll have a look tomorrow to see if I can things closer to actually building on f29 and f30.
I can highly recommend setting up the packages in your COPR such that they directly fetch the SPEC from src.fp.o: https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#scm
That way you don't really need to do much other than adding those mappings.
Kind regards, Till
Hi
On April 2, 2019 8:52:36 AM GMT+02:00, Till Hofmann thofmann@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 4/1/19 11:40 PM, qrsBRWN wrote:
A quick heads up. I spent a little time getting aquatinted with copr
and
think I have figured out the basics. I'll have a look tomorrow to see
if
I can things closer to actually building on f29 and f30.
I can highly recommend setting up the packages in your COPR such that they directly fetch the SPEC from src.fp.o: https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#scm
That way you don't really need to do much other than adding those mappings.
Yeah, that was a pleasant surprise. Right now I'm getting my head around build types in meson since wlroots won't build with the recent changes in meson. This is much more fun than expected.
Kind regards, Till
Sway mailing list -- sway@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to sway-leave@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/sway@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hello,
Can you move the project under the sway-sig group on copr so that everyone can play with it?
Thanks,
Hi
Yeah, I haven't had much time to get anything done except figuring out that the new meson defaults for b_ndebug breaks the wlroots builds.
I also need to figure out how to move the project. I'll have a look later today, hopefully.
Br M
On April 6, 2019 8:09:13 AM GMT+02:00, "Timothée Floure" timothee.floure@fnux.ch wrote:
Hello,
Can you move the project under the sway-sig group on copr so that everyone can play with it?
Thanks,
-- Timothée
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 09:13:32AM +0200, qrsBRWN wrote:
Hi
On April 2, 2019 8:52:36 AM GMT+02:00, Till Hofmann
thofmann@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 4/1/19 11:40 PM, qrsBRWN wrote:
A quick heads up. I spent a little time getting aquatinted with
copr
and
think I have figured out the basics. I'll have a look tomorrow to
see
if
I can things closer to actually building on f29 and f30.
I can highly recommend setting up the packages in your COPR such
that
they directly fetch the SPEC from src.fp.o: https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#scm
That way you don't really need to do much other than adding those mappings.
Yeah, that was a pleasant surprise. Right now I'm getting my head
around build types in meson since wlroots won't build with the recent changes in meson.
This is much more fun than expected.
Kind regards, Till
Sway mailing list -- sway@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to sway-leave@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/sway@lists.fedoraproject.org _______________________________________________ Sway mailing list -- sway@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to sway-leave@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/sway@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi again,
On 06. 04. 19 14:17, qrsBRWN wrote:
Yeah, I haven't had much time to get anything done except figuring out that the new meson defaults for b_ndebug breaks the wlroots builds.
This seems to have been reverted, and the b_ndebug option should not be set by the %meson macro anymore: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
I also need to figure out how to move the project. I'll have a look later today, hopefully.
I tried playing with that for a bit and I do not see a way to move any of my projects to any other user/group. Perhaps a sig admin needs to create the COPR project directly? Also, any user that wants access to other user's project has apparently request that access first – there is no way for the owner to add arbitrary other user.
Till, do you have a way to log in to COPR as the sway-sig group? If so, perhaps that is the way to either create a group COPR project or to request group access to existing one.
Best regards,
Hi
On April 9, 2019 5:08:59 PM GMT+02:00, "Jan Staněk" jstanek@redhat.com wrote:
Hi again,
On 06. 04. 19 14:17, qrsBRWN wrote:
Yeah, I haven't had much time to get anything done except figuring
out
that the new meson defaults for b_ndebug breaks the wlroots builds.
This seems to have been reverted, and the b_ndebug option should not be set by the %meson macro anymore: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
Yeah I saw that. I still have trouble getting wlroots to build on f30. That is probably because I'm doing things wrong. I'm not used to meson and not used to copr.
I will try to invest some time tonight and see if I can get wlroots sorted so I can get to sway.
If anyone sees something I'm obviously doing wrong please feel free to tell me. I'm always eager to learn.
I also need to figure out how to move the project. I'll have a look later today, hopefully.
I tried playing with that for a bit and I do not see a way to move any of my projects to any other user/group. Perhaps a sig admin needs to create the COPR project directly? Also, any user that wants access to other user's project has apparently request that access first – there is no way for the owner to add arbitrary other user.
Till, do you have a way to log in to COPR as the sway-sig group? If so, perhaps that is the way to either create a group COPR project or to request group access to existing one.
Best regards,
On 09. 04. 19 17:13, qrsBRWN wrote:
Yeah I saw that. I still have trouble getting wlroots to build on f30. That is probably because I'm doing things wrong. I'm not used to meson and not used to copr.
I will try to invest some time tonight and see if I can get wlroots sorted so I can get to sway.
If anyone sees something I'm obviously doing wrong please feel free to tell me. I'm always eager to learn.
Which specfile/COPR are you using? I'm willing to take a look, but I could not find a link in this thread.
I took a look at the wlroots spec at src.fp.o (master branch), and there are several places in which it can (and quite possibly should) be simplified – i.e. using pkg-config requires, removing explicit requires for the -devel subpackage, etc.
Good luck!
On 4/9/19 5:13 PM, qrsBRWN wrote:
Yeah I saw that. I still have trouble getting wlroots to build on f30. That is probably because I'm doing things wrong. I'm not used to meson and not used to copr.
What exactly is your problem? I've had a quick look, one issue is that there are unused variables and the build uses -Werror=unused-variables. There are other similar errors, the attached patch should fix the build.
I will try to invest some time tonight and see if I can get wlroots sorted so I can get to sway.
If anyone sees something I'm obviously doing wrong please feel free to tell me. I'm always eager to learn.
It's hard to see what you're doing wrong if we can't see what you're doing ;)
Kind regards Till
On April 11, 2019 8:22:13 AM GMT+02:00, Till Hofmann thofmann@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 4/9/19 5:13 PM, qrsBRWN wrote:
Yeah I saw that. I still have trouble getting wlroots to build on
f30. That is probably because I'm doing things wrong. I'm not used to meson and not used to copr.
What exactly is your problem? I've had a quick look, one issue is that there are unused variables and the build uses -Werror=unused-variables. There are other similar errors, the attached patch should fix the build.
Great, thanks :)
I will try to invest some time tonight and see if I can get wlroots
sorted so I can get to sway.
If anyone sees something I'm obviously doing wrong please feel free
to tell me. I'm always eager to learn.
It's hard to see what you're doing wrong if we can't see what you're doing ;)
Yeah, I know :) I was meaning to fix that part and actually voice what I'm struggling with but life and work keeps getting in the way. I was pretty sure I was missing something really basic in HOW I used copr since it has being built for Rawhide and I was using the same sources and specfile. Now I'm, of course, much less certain of that ;)
Kind regards Till
Hello,
I tried playing with that for a bit and I do not see a way to move any of my projects to any other user/group. Perhaps a sig admin needs to create the COPR project directly? Also, any user that wants access to other user's project has apparently request that access first – there is no way for the owner to add arbitrary other user.
I just initialized the sway-sig group in copr [0], directly linked to our FAS group! If there's no way to move a project, can we perhaps create a new one under this group since there are no users on the current one (yet).
[0] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/sway-sig/coprs/
Cheers,
Hello,
[0] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/sway-sig/coprs/
Can the people working on the copr repository create a project under this group? I'll go ahead and do it if nothing happen by the end of the week-end, as I've never seen the existing (?) project.
Regards,
Chiming in kind of late here...
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:08 AM qrsBRWN qrsbrwn@uidzero.se wrote:
Hi
On April 1, 2019 1:19:58 PM GMT+02:00, "Jan Staněk" jstanek@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Markus!
On 31. 03. 19 14:11, qrsBRWN wrote:
This we need to get quickly to option 1 afterwards it may have served
it's purpose though
From my experience, creating module is rather time consuming, and I have not yet wrapped my head around it properly. Although it is the correct way forward to have it shipped in Fedora, for quick'n'dirty packages for testing purposes COPR may be better.
I believe using a COPR is best because this is a one time transition period. Once f31 is released, sway will be updated just like everything else. If the sway packages had made f30 I would have said to not even bother with a COPR, but I forget that not everyone upgrades immediately.
Yeah modules is uncharted territory for me too. I'm thinking along to lines that to get to a module we at least need a COPR for testing. I will have to be pretty much a permanent fixture so there's no question about where to get the correct version of the handful of packages that needs to be tested together.
I found skimming over the modules docs interesting as somebody also new to them: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/modularity/making-modules/adding-new-mo...
If you are willing to create/maintain one, we could probably declare it the "official Sway SIG COPR", with a disclaimer "for testing purposes only" and a link to the module/installation instructions once they are ready.
On 3/31/19 1:59 PM, Timothée Floure wrote:
Hello,
Do we (as in anyone here) have a clear view of what remains before testing on f29 and f30 can begin in a broader sense?
I don't think we should update sway in F29 since 1.0 is a major release with potential breaking changes. I believe we should either:
Yes, I agree, we shouldn't update sway to 1.0 in any existing releases.
- Use modularity to provide a Sway 1.0 module for F29(+F30?)
- Maintain (as a SIG) some kind of "official" copr repository for F29(+F30?)
Does anyone has an opinion on the subject? It would also be nice to post an article on the magazine once Sway 1.0 is officialy available in Fedora :-)
Imho creating a module is the best way forward. I was planning to create a module for sway 1.0 once all necessary packages have the SIG as co-maintainer (which is necessary to create the respective branches).
Posting an article on Fedora Magazine sounds like a good idea!
Kind regards Till
-
Dan Čermák -
Jan Staněk -
Jeff Peeler -
qrsBRWN -
Till Hofmann -
Timothée Floure