Bug 2072649

Summary:	Please branch and build gi-docgen in epel9
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Davide Cavalca <davide>
Component:	gi-docgen	Assignee:	Ben Beasley <code>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	code, mattias.ellert, redhat-bugzilla
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	FutureFeature, Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	gi-docgen-2022.1-8.el9.next gi-docgen-2022.1-9.el9	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-11-18 01:48:43 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:	2072650, 2072651, 2130608
Bug Blocks:	1914423, 2052634

Description Davide Cavalca 2022-04-06 17:35:17 UTC

Please branch and build gi-docgen in epel9.

If you do not wish to maintain gi-docgen in epel9,
or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner,
the EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package;
please add the epel-packagers-sig group through
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gi-docgen/addgroup
and grant it commit access, or collaborator access on epel* branches.

Comment 1 Ben Beasley 2022-04-06 17:41:24 UTC

Thanks for reporting the missing adobe-source-code-pro-fonts dependency in bug 2072650. When that is available, I will gladly branch and build gi-docgen.

Comment 2 Ben Beasley 2022-04-06 17:47:42 UTC

If I comment out the missing font dependencies (for testing purposes only), I get:

> No matching package to install: 'python3dist(typogrify)'

Would you care to file an EPEL9 request bug on python-typogrify too?

Comment 3 Davide Cavalca 2022-04-06 17:52:05 UTC

Done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072651

Comment 4 Ben Beasley 2022-08-01 12:15:00 UTC

Looks like I can do this when RHEL 9.1 comes out with adobe-source-code-pro-fonts, then. Feel free to remind me if I forget.

Comment 5 Davide Cavalca 2022-09-21 15:42:41 UTC

Looks like adobe-source-code-pro-fonts is now available: http://mirror.stream.centos.org/9-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/adobe-source-code-pro-fonts-2.030.1.050-12.el9.1.noarch.rpm

Comment 6 Ben Beasley 2022-09-21 17:06:01 UTC

(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #5)
> Looks like adobe-source-code-pro-fonts is now available:
> http://mirror.stream.centos.org/9-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/adobe-
> source-code-pro-fonts-2.030.1.050-12.el9.1.noarch.rpm

It looks like adobe-source-code-pro-fonts is not in RHEL yet, so I can’t build for epel9.

I did try building for epel9-next, but I found that python3-typogrify is not installable because its dependency python3-smartypants is missing: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-smartypants.

Would you like to file the EPEL9 request for that one too?

Comment 7 Davide Cavalca 2022-09-28 15:38:42 UTC

Done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130608

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-11-04 02:10:55 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-NEXT-2022-83de2d1a5d has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9 Next. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-NEXT-2022-83de2d1a5d

Comment 9 Ben Beasley 2022-11-04 02:11:44 UTC

This bug will remain open until gi-docgen is in EPEL9 “proper.”

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-11-04 11:34:15 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-NEXT-2022-83de2d1a5d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 Next testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-NEXT-2022-83de2d1a5d

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-11-13 02:53:42 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-NEXT-2022-83de2d1a5d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 Next stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 12 Mattias Ellert 2022-11-15 21:57:38 UTC

Now buildable in epel9 proper.
Scratch build in koji of the epel9-next version in epel9:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94218954

Comment 13 Ben Beasley 2022-11-16 13:23:46 UTC

(In reply to Mattias Ellert from comment #12)
> Now buildable in epel9 proper.
> Scratch build in koji of the epel9-next version in epel9:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94218954

Thank you for the heads-up. Branch requested: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/49142

Comment 14 Robert Scheck 2022-11-17 00:18:02 UTC

Given the release of RHEL 9.1, this should be able to move forward now, right?

Comment 15 Ben Beasley 2022-11-17 00:28:37 UTC

(In reply to Robert Scheck from comment #14)
> Given the release of RHEL 9.1, this should be able to move forward now,
> right?

I noted in the comment above yours that I had requested the epel9 branch. That request was processed by this morning. I would have had a build in the EPEL9 testing repo today, but koji was having a meltdown. Expect a Bodhi update in the next day or so.

Comment 16 Robert Scheck 2022-11-17 00:33:04 UTC

You are right, sorry for the double "heads up". And thanks for taking care! :)

Comment 17 Ben Beasley 2022-11-17 00:38:25 UTC

(In reply to Robert Scheck from comment #16)
> You are right, sorry for the double "heads up". And thanks for taking care!
> :)

No problem! I’m glad to have some help keeping an eye on things.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2022-11-17 14:52:27 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-989476cd02 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-989476cd02

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2022-11-18 01:48:43 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-989476cd02 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.