Bug 2029012 - Please branch and build rpkg in epel9
Summary: Please branch and build rpkg in epel9
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora EPEL
Classification: Fedora
Component: rpkg
Version: epel9
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ondřej Nosek
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2029014 2034436 2034438 2034439 2034466
Blocks: 2029011
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-12-04 04:26 UTC by Carl George 🤠
Modified: 2022-02-19 02:04 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version: rpkg-1.64-2.el9
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-02-19 02:04:24 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Carl George 🤠 2021-12-04 04:26:38 UTC
Please branch and build rpkg in epel9.

If you do not wish to maintain rpkg in epel9, or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner, I would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package.

Comment 1 Carl George 🤠 2021-12-13 05:25:31 UTC
Will you be able to branch and build rpkg in epel9?  I would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish to build it on epel9.

Comment 2 Ondřej Nosek 2021-12-14 01:37:22 UTC
Hi,

I can build rpkg/fedpkg together with other releases, but the initial release is more complicated.
Currently, rpkg requires dependencies that are not available in epel9. At least these:

python3-GitPython
python3-cccolutils
python3-koji
python3-mock
python3-nose (questionable, should be replaced with pytest package)
python3-openidc-client
python3-requests-kerberos

All above should be whitelisted in epel9, including rpkg itself.
Is it better to ask particular maintainers to provide build or just tag older releases into epel9 as a temporary solution? Do you have some suggestions on how to start?

Comment 3 Ondřej Nosek 2021-12-14 16:42:19 UTC
'python3-nose' is no longer needed. I dropped this dependency in the latest dist-git code.

Comment 4 Carl George 🤠 2021-12-20 19:38:08 UTC
I've already got a request open for GitPython.  I'll take a look at the others and open similar requests as needed.

Comment 5 Carl George 🤠 2021-12-21 02:50:32 UTC
I've opened requests for all those dependencies listed, except for python3-mock.  In bug 2029156 the maintainer indicated that python-mock is deprecated, and thus will not be added to epel9.  Can rpkg be ported to the standard library unittest.mock?

Comment 6 Miro Hrončok 2021-12-21 10:01:04 UTC
rpkg works with Python 2.7, 3.6, 3.9 and 3.10.

It can be ported, but it needs to follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecatePythonMock#How_to_migrate_to_unittest.mock "If upstream really needs to support Python versions without unittest.mock" advice.

Comment 7 Miro Hrončok 2021-12-21 11:56:17 UTC
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #6)
> rpkg works with Python 2.7, 3.6, 3.9 and 3.10.
> 
> It can be ported, but it needs to follow
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/
> DeprecatePythonMock#How_to_migrate_to_unittest.mock "If upstream really
> needs to support Python versions without unittest.mock" advice.

https://pagure.io/rpkg/pull-request/596

Comment 8 Miro Hrončok 2021-12-21 12:15:51 UTC
FWIW I'd much rather drop legacy Python support entirely and use Python 3.6 even on RHEL 7. But that's a bit off-topic here.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-02-10 04:30:19 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-fa2059dc76 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-fa2059dc76

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-02-11 02:02:58 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-fa2059dc76 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-fa2059dc76

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

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-02-19 02:04:24 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-fa2059dc76 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.