Description of problem: python-pecan package is missing from EPEL 8 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
Allow me to be more specific. What we are requesting is python3-pecan.
branch requested https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/19520
(In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #5) > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #4) > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #1) > > > The ceph project needs this. > > > > The Storage SIG in CentOS usually builds Ceph for Centos, it's already built > > for centos7 and i think they also plan to add it for centos8. You are also > > planning to create it in epel? > > Hi Alfredo, > > It's a requirement for our upstream CI as well as upstream devs/users using > centos8 to build/test ceph. Couldn't upstream ci use Storage SIG repos instead of EPEL? @gfidente could you help here about the right place to get packages to build Ceph?
We are only going to pursue this package for EPEL8. PR opened in fedora for EPEL8 branch: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pecan/pull-request/3
(In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #6) > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #5) > > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #4) > > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #1) > > > > The ceph project needs this. > > > > > > The Storage SIG in CentOS usually builds Ceph for Centos, it's already built > > > for centos7 and i think they also plan to add it for centos8. You are also > > > planning to create it in epel? > > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > It's a requirement for our upstream CI as well as upstream devs/users using > > centos8 to build/test ceph. > > Couldn't upstream ci use Storage SIG repos instead of EPEL? No, we can't do that because our CI is not only for testing, we produce repositories and packages for development and releases as well as testing. This means our users depend on packages existing in EPEL. Since we want to support CentOS8, having packages in EPEL8 is crucial.
(In reply to Alfredo Deza from comment #8) > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #6) > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #5) > > > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #4) > > > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #1) > > > > > The ceph project needs this. > > > > > > > > The Storage SIG in CentOS usually builds Ceph for Centos, it's already built > > > > for centos7 and i think they also plan to add it for centos8. You are also > > > > planning to create it in epel? > > > > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > > > It's a requirement for our upstream CI as well as upstream devs/users using > > > centos8 to build/test ceph. > > > > Couldn't upstream ci use Storage SIG repos instead of EPEL? > > No, we can't do that because our CI is not only for testing, we produce > repositories and packages for development and releases as well as testing. > This means our users depend on packages > existing in EPEL. Since we want to support CentOS8, having packages in EPEL8 > is crucial. So, iiuc, you will produce and release ceph packages for CentOS8 that will be installed from your own repos with EPEL8 for python dependencies, is that correct?
(In reply to Alfredo Deza from comment #7) > We are only going to pursue this package for EPEL8. PR opened in fedora for > EPEL8 branch: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pecan/pull-request/3 pecan requires some packages not in epel8: - nothing provides python3-simplegeneric needed by python3-pecan-1.3.2-9.el8.noarch - nothing provides python3-logutils needed by python3-pecan-1.3.2-9.el8.noarch - nothing provides python3-singledispatch needed by python3-pecan-1.3.2-9.el8.noarch
(In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #9) > (In reply to Alfredo Deza from comment #8) > > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #6) > > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #5) > > > > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #4) > > > > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #1) > > > > > > The ceph project needs this. > > > > > > > > > > The Storage SIG in CentOS usually builds Ceph for Centos, it's already built > > > > > for centos7 and i think they also plan to add it for centos8. You are also > > > > > planning to create it in epel? > > > > > > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > > > > > It's a requirement for our upstream CI as well as upstream devs/users using > > > > centos8 to build/test ceph. > > > > > > Couldn't upstream ci use Storage SIG repos instead of EPEL? > > > > No, we can't do that because our CI is not only for testing, we produce > > repositories and packages for development and releases as well as testing. > > This means our users depend on packages > > existing in EPEL. Since we want to support CentOS8, having packages in EPEL8 > > is crucial. > > So, iiuc, you will produce and release ceph packages for CentOS8 that will > be installed from your own repos with EPEL8 for python dependencies, is that > correct? Yes, that is correct. The process is documented here (for CentOS7): https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/start/quick-start-preflight/#rhel-centos
(In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #6) > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #5) > > (In reply to Alfredo Moralejo from comment #4) > > > (In reply to Brad Hubbard from comment #1) > > > > The ceph project needs this. > > > > > > The Storage SIG in CentOS usually builds Ceph for Centos, it's already built > > > for centos7 and i think they also plan to add it for centos8. You are also > > > planning to create it in epel? > > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > It's a requirement for our upstream CI as well as upstream devs/users using > > centos8 to build/test ceph. > > Couldn't upstream ci use Storage SIG repos instead of EPEL? > > @gfidente could you help here about the right place to get packages to build > Ceph? we do have builds of Ceph (and deps, including python-pecan) in CBS (maintained within storage SIG) and we consume thos for RDO and OpenStack but I think the request in this BZ is to have some deps in EPEL8 as well; the reason being that Ceph used to provide community RPMs [1] and those used to depend on non-ceph packages found in EPEL7 I am not sure if we have any chance to revisit this and consume the deps built in CBS already? 1. https://docs.ceph.com/docs/nautilus/install/build-ceph/#rpm-package-manager
all ceph/nautilus deps, including python-pecan and ceph itself have now been built upstream in centos cbs [1] we should soon have a centos-ceph-nautilus-release package distributed in centos8 to install the additional .repo files, as it used to be for centos7 1. https://cbs.centos.org/koji/builds?tagID=1891
Would someone please merge the latest master branch into epel8? https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pecan/pull-request/6 It's important that we have the fixes from rhbz#1803982, because that removes a lot of dependency bloat on some old stale packages.
Merged and built in https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50298888
This package has changed maintainer in Fedora. Reassigning to the new maintainer of this component.