If you do not wish to maintain python-typing-extensions for EPEL 9, or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner, the EPEL Packaging SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package; please grant commit access to the epel-packagers-sig group, or collaborator access on epel* branches. I would also be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package (FAS: salimma).
Added salimma as admin and commit access to epel-packagers-sig group
This package does not appear branched and build for EPEL 9. Was it closed by mistake?
Reopening, the packge does not seem to be build for epel9. Bug 2082027 looks like a duplicate.
*** Bug 2085498 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 2082027 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Michel, it looks like you have the necessary permissions to branch and build this package. There is currently an unsatisfied BuildRequires on python3-pytest-xdist, but it appears to be spurious; there is no mention of xdist in the package source, and the tests run fine with the BR removed from the spec file. Could you please go ahead and build an EPEL9 package? Thanks!
(In reply to Matthew Davis from comment #2) > This package does not appear branched and build for EPEL 9. Was it closed > by mistake? I should have changed the assignee instead of closing the ticket after granting access.
Michel, are you still going to branch and build this? It’s one of the last missing indirect dependencies (that I don’t have privileges on) for a non-bootstrap build of grpc in EPEL9, so I’m happy to be added as an additional EPEL co-maintainer if you won’t have a chance to do it.
(In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #8) > Michel, are you still going to branch and build this? It’s one of the last > missing indirect dependencies (that I don’t have privileges on) for a > non-bootstrap build of grpc in EPEL9, so I’m happy to be added as an > additional EPEL co-maintainer if you won’t have a chance to do it. I assume your fas is music, I just added you as a co-maintainer.
(In reply to Jonny Heggheim from comment #9) > I assume your fas is music, I just added you as a co-maintainer. Thanks! I’m building now…
*** Bug 2089367 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #10) > Thanks! I’m building now… Thanks
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-30d92a71a6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-30d92a71a6
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-30d92a71a6 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-2022-30d92a71a6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-30d92a71a6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
I need to patch python3-rich requirements now as we got very recent python3-typing-extensions in epel9. The hard requirements needs (python3.9dist(typing-extensions) < 4 with python3.9dist(typing-extensions) >= 3.7.4)
(In reply to Parag Nemade from comment #16) > I need to patch python3-rich requirements now as we got very recent > python3-typing-extensions in epel9. The hard requirements needs > (python3.9dist(typing-extensions) < 4 with python3.9dist(typing-extensions) > >= 3.7.4) Is there something blocking you from just upgrading it? It looks like your python-rich-9.10.0 package for EPEL9 has always been FTI due to unsatisfied dependencies: no python3dist(typing-extensions) at all until now, and still no python3dist(commonmark), bug 2085496. Meanwhile, the spec file for python-rich-12.4.4 from Rawhide works fine on EPEL9 except for the missing dependency python3dist(commonmark). If you’re worried about the incompatible updates policy, I don’t think it should apply if if nobody could ever install the old version.
The python-rich upstream is fast moving development, they introduce new dependencies as well. That is reason I wanted to see it be built and successfully working at some version with all its dependencies. There is nothing preventing me to update this package in EPEL9. Just look upstream release frequency https://github.com/Textualize/rich/tags I know about FTI and working on it. I just don't like to grab someone's package and build it in EPEL. So patiently waiting for dependencies to be built in EPEL9. I admit it was my mistake to build python-rich without checking its runtime dependencies availability in EPEL9.