Please branch and build python-fastapi in EPEL 8/9. I would like to request a python package for fastapi (https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/) similar to the existing packages in Fedora (python3-fastapi). I could help with testing.
I cannot commit to doing this myself, but I added acl: epel-packagers-sig (commit) so it's easier for somebody else to pick up.
Would it help if I try to provide a spec file? Thank you very much.
It really needs somebody who is a packager. The spec file might not require any modfications, but somebody who knows the EPEL rules and can take of doing the builds (or not) as appropriate is necessary.
I didn’t see this while it was assigned to the python-pygraphviz component, so I’m only now able to comment on it. I’ll start by saying that even if it proved feasible, I don’t think that packaging a years-old initial version of FastAPI is a good idea. Considering the current version, even the necessary build system, https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pdm-backend, is not available in EPEL9. If this could be worked around, or a slightly older version packaged, there are still a *lot* of missing dependencies, many of which rely on a fairly current Python environment. I don’t think the age of the Python environment and system packages in EL9 can be worked around in any reasonable way here. I’m not saying this is impossible, but I think it’s pretty close. I’m closing this as CANTFIX. I would be happy to help get python-fastapi into EPEL10, if the necessary dependencies can be lined up. And I’m not opposed in principle to someone maintaining FastAPI in EPEL9 if they can figure out how to overcome the obstacles to doing so – I just don’t think that’s likely to happen.
Thank you for your comment. Yes, I understand that the EPEL 9 python stack might not be easy to get right for the fastapi dependencies. For our project EPEL 9 is our next deployment platform, so that's kind of important for us, but I understand your concerns. If fastapi can get into EPEL10 that would be great. I guess that starting from the stack of the Fedora version in which RHEL 10 is going to be "based" should provide a coherent set of dependencies.
(In reply to Enrique from comment #5) > Thank you for your comment. Yes, I understand that the EPEL 9 python stack > might not be easy to get right for the fastapi dependencies. For our project > EPEL 9 is our next deployment platform, so that's kind of important for us, > but I understand your concerns. > If fastapi can get into EPEL10 that would be great. I guess that starting > from the stack of the Fedora version in which RHEL 10 is going to be "based" > should provide a coherent set of dependencies. Again, if it turns out that the obstacles are not as insurmountable as I thought, and someone figures out how to line up all the dependencies for FastAPI in EPEL9, I am perfectly happy to help maintain it there. It’s just not always possible to provide relatively current packages of arbitrary software for enterprise distributions. Even with EPEL10, it will take a while to get all the dependencies branched, but I am more optimistic that it is likely to be possible.