Description of problem: Can ansible-collection-community-general be branched for EPEL9 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): current fedora version How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
In order to accomplish this, we would need to figure out the packaging of Ansible itself, as well as the ansible-generator and macros that are currently included in Fedora's `ansible-core` and `ansible` packages. `ansible-core` seems to be part of EL 9 itself[1], but it does not include the generator or the macros. Kevin, what are your thoughts on this? Does it make sense to split the macros out into a separate package that we can then include in epel9? [1]: https://git.centos.org/rpms/ansible-core/tree/c9-beta
Yeah, so lets see... our options are: 1. Try and convince ansible-core rhel maintainers to add our generator/macros. 2. Make a new ansible-rpm-macros package and use that in both fedora and epel 3. Move the generator/macros back into 'ansible' package and use that in fedora and epel I think 1 is going to be hard and then also means adjustments become very slow/difficult. I think 3 means that small collections packages would need to pull a gigantic ansible package they don't need as a buildrequires. So, I am leaning toward 2. Adding dmsimard here for his thoughts.
(In reply to Kevin Fenzi from comment #2) > Yeah, so lets see... our options are: > > 1. Try and convince ansible-core rhel maintainers to add our > generator/macros. > 2. Make a new ansible-rpm-macros package and use that in both fedora and epel > 3. Move the generator/macros back into 'ansible' package and use that in > fedora and epel > > I think 1 is going to be hard and then also means adjustments become very > slow/difficult. > I think 3 means that small collections packages would need to pull a > gigantic ansible package they don't need as a buildrequires. > So, I am leaning toward 2. > > Adding dmsimard here for his thoughts. I've tried to think to see if there would be other options but I've come up short. I agree with Kevin's assessment and would also privilege option #2 in light of the cons with #1 and #3.
Given that I just tried and failed to do option 1 in bug 2038267, let's go for option 2. However, I'd probably suggest calling it "ansible-packaging" instead, since it's both macros and generators. That matches the naming for Rust and Nodejs equivalents of this too.
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4) > Given that I just tried and failed to do option 1 in bug 2038267, let's go > for option 2. However, I'd probably suggest calling it "ansible-packaging" > instead, since it's both macros and generators. That matches the naming for > Rust and Nodejs equivalents of this too. I don't have a strong opinion on the name but if there is a precedent for that format I would go with that. It's been a while since I did a new Fedora package request proposal but I can draft one sometime next week if no one beats me to it first.
Please note that, in order to add `ansible-packaging` to Fedora, we first need to get https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ansible/pull-request/19 merged and figure out how to handle dependent packages.
Package review BZ filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2038591 Once it's accepted, we can make the necessary tweaks to ansible and ansible-core.
:) looks like that review went through
(In reply to Pat Riehecky from comment #8) > :) looks like that review went through Everything is ready for F36 and EPEL9 now.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6e8e06401c has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6e8e06401c
Sorry for the delay. I just submitted a build. Please leave karma if possible. I only co-maintain this collection, so someone else will have to take care of the other collections you requested for epel9. Thanks!
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #9) > (In reply to Pat Riehecky from comment #8) > > :) looks like that review went through > > Everything is ready for F36 and EPEL9 now. I should also mention that F34+ is also set if you want, since "ansible-packaging" is available there too, with updated ansible-core too.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6e8e06401c 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-2022-6e8e06401c See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6e8e06401c has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.