Description of problem: fedpkg has request-repo command. I wanted to create namespace for tests in my package. But it refuses to try it this way. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fedpkg-1.38-4.fc32.noarch How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. fedpkg request-repo --namespace tests bind 2. 3. Actual results: usage: fedpkg request-repo [-h] [--namespace {rpms,container,modules,flatpaks}] [--description DESCRIPTION] [--monitor {no-monitoring,monitoring,monitoring-with-scratch}] [--upstreamurl UPSTREAMURL] [--summary SUMMARY] [--exception] [--no-initial-commit] name [bug] fedpkg request-repo: error: argument --namespace: invalid choice: 'tests' (choose from 'rpms', 'container', 'modules', 'flatpaks') Expected results: the same for fedpkg request-tests-repo Additional info: I was told by friend, there is special command request-tests-repo. I haven't noticed it. Is there reason why request-repo can create multiple of namespaces, but only tests have to be created different way?
Hi. Does `request-tests-repo` work for you in the end? There are reasons to have two separate subcommands `request-repo` and `request-tests-repo`. There are different sets of input arguments for both subcommands. I was considering unification couple months ago, but sets of required (and optional) arguments are quite different. After unification, schema (that is description shown after --help) would look unnecessarily complex and also implementation would be more difficult (including more robust argument checking). Now you can quite easily see, what arguments are needed for subcommands.
No, it does not work in the end anyway. I tried to create tests/bind with it, scm ticket[1] got created. But it was automatically closed. It seems they require upstreamurl specified. But that was not required by fedpkg. And according to request-tests-repo --help, it is not even supported. It would be nice if you coodinated what is mandatory and what should be optional. I am not sure what upstreamurl should be specified, it might default to rpms namespace of the same name, because the tests are not usually managed by upstream. 1. https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/26934 2. https://pagure.io/fedscm-admin/issue/36
Also, fedpkg request-tests-repo contains obsolete URL link pointing to wiki. Updated URL is: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/share-test-code/
(In reply to Ondřej Nosek from comment #1) > Hi. > Does `request-tests-repo` work for you in the end? > > There are reasons to have two separate subcommands `request-repo` and > `request-tests-repo`. There are different sets of input arguments for both > subcommands. I was considering unification couple months ago, but sets of > required (and optional) arguments are quite different. After unification, > schema (that is description shown after --help) would look unnecessarily > complex and also implementation would be more difficult (including more > robust argument checking). Now you can quite easily see, what arguments are > needed for subcommands. It seems to me only namespace and component name should be mandatory. Also, test details from --help might move just to manual page. I doubt it should be common to get first information about namespace from the tool requesting it. I think short page describing existing namespaces and their purpose would be better, and --help might contain just single link to details about any namespaces. With hypertext links to details about each namespace.
Hi Peter, I can see it is a valid issue with the subcommand functionality. Also, it seems fedscm-admin opened the request (https://pagure.io/fedscm-admin/pull-request/37) that deals with the situation. Until it is merged, maybe you can overcome it with requesting test repo again and quickly (before it is automatically closed) manually add to the created ticket: "upstreamurl": "", I will open the ticket for fedpkg to reconsider your suggestions and possibly other minor changes.
It seems I lack ability to modify contents of created ticket. I found no way to edit the ticket.
OK, it was just an assumption. I can remember I was able to manually close a ticket (and I am not a developer of fedscm-admin). Didn't try to modify it but I thought, a modification would be also allowed. And it is not obviously. Sorry for the wrong attempt.
Hopefully, PR will be merged soon and there is no need to do workarounds.
Or ... I should have been quicker ... modify temporarily sudo vim /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/fedpkg/cli.py: variable 'ticket_body' around line 920: + 'upstreamurl': '', It may work immediately because fedscm-admin has to be merged and then released.
Maybe if backend is processing upstreamurl, why is it impossible to specify it on client side? And it seems description might not be mandatory once it is merged and deployed.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 32 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 32 on 2021-05-25. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '32'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 32 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 32 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2021-05-25. Fedora 32 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.