Bug 1297679

Summary:	New version of aws-sdk-go is available
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Ed Marshall <esm>
Component:	golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go	Assignee:	Fridolín Pokorný <fpokorny>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	24	CC:	fpokorny, jchaloup, mrunge
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go-1.4.9-1.fc26	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2016-09-15 08:27:19 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:	1297549, 1297550, 1327497
Bug Blocks:

Description Ed Marshall 2016-01-12 08:42:21 UTC

Version 1.0.7 of golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go is available; a newer release is required by Hashicorp Vault, which I'm in the process of trying to package for Fedora.

I've built a placeholder version in my vault copr for now, if it saves you a little bit of time:

COPR: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/logic/vault/
SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/logic/vault/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00149413-golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go/golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go-1.0.7-0.fc24.src.rpm

This update requires golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath and golang-github-go-ini-ini, both of which are available in the COPR. I've started the package review process for them as bug 1297550 (jmespath) and bug 1297549 (ini).

Comment 1 Jan Kurik 2016-02-24 15:44:20 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 24 development cycle.
Changing version to '24'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/HouseKeeping/Fedora24#Rawhide_Rebase

Comment 2 Jan Chaloupka 2016-04-20 08:30:25 UTC

I am updating aws-sdk-go to 1.1.3. Will it be sufficient?

Comment 3 Ed Marshall 2016-04-21 22:09:18 UTC

It's definitely new enough to have the missing APIs available, so yeah, I'd imagine that will work out (assuming there haven't been huge backwards-compat changes).