The current protonvpn-cli package available in Fedora is not the updated official one. As announced in https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/protonvpn-in-official-repos-any-interest/83547 I have submitted the dependencies needed to have the official protonvpn-cli packaged in Fedora: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2211886 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2211887 I've also submitted protonvpn (the GUI) package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2211888 I did not want to wait for the new apps announced by upstream, for which there's no ETA. Once approved, I'll add proton-sig group as co-maintainer of all those packages. I have already successfully packaged the official protonvpn-cli, see: https://mattia.fedorapeople.org/protonvpn-cli/ https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mattia/ProtonVPN/ I'd happy to co-maintain and update the Fedora package as well (maybe I can be added to proton-sig?) Reproducible: Always
Hey @Mattia, thanks for your effort on making the app easily accessible. The community contribution is really important for us, but in this occasion it's not exactly the way we want to go. If I'm honest, I recently asked for the proton-python-client package to be removed (I had submitted a new package a bit over a year ago or so). We don't want to upload the current as cleaning this later for the new client that we're working on will require even more time then needed, thus we refrained ourselves from publishing officially. Once we have the new app out, I'll be publishing all the required packages for the official fedora repositories, but until then I would appreciate if you don't upload the packages themselves, especially since we won't be pushing any new changes to the new client in favor of the new one. Until then, please use our own repositories so that we avoid polluting Fedora repositories with packages that are no longer being updated.
I have started to package those by myself because the packages from proton repository are buggy. I have recently start using protonvpn and I tried to install both the GUI and the CLI, but none of them worked out of the box. In the end, I've found that for some reason protonvpn-nm-cli wants the strongswan NM plugin to be installed otherwise trying to connect to the vpn fails. Getting the logs to find out what was wrong was equally hard, as both in GUI and CLI the command to get logs fail (because of a comparison between offset-naive and offset-aware dates). Anyway, I certainly don't want to address bugs downstream, so if you prefer to not have those packages in Fedora, I'll retire the package submissions. However I'll continue to publish them in COPR repo, primarily for my personal use. I'm not sure if the outdated protonvpn-cli currently in Fedora repos is in a working state, maybe you should have it retired as well.
Thanks for the quick reply Mattia. Yes please retire the package submissions please. In regards to the current CLI we leave it as is because (to our knowledge) there are still people using it, and until we publish our new project we won't be retiring it.
As the current maintainer for the deprecated protonvpn-cli client and package, I am onboard to help facilitate the best possible upgrade path for new users. Happy to have the existing package obsoleted or replaced by something else down the line. The COPR seems like the best middle-ground here, so that users who want the software with the risk of future noncompatibility with the new client can still get the bits installed and working on their system. With proper messaging and outreach, we could also put out some awareness out a user should do a full system reinstall when migrating from the COPR packages to the future rewritten packages. Something to think about here too… I'm not sure what the timeline is for the new library to be delivered. I was waiting on it for a while too. But we should also consider that the next major enterprise Linux version will be branched in less than a year's time. Now is a good time to think about what we would want to get in by Fedora 40, so that whatever is packaged by then could make it into EPEL, CentOS Stream, RHEL, Rocky Linux, AlmaLinux versions 10 and so on. Even better if it could get into Fedora 39 later this year, so there would be one full release cycle to test things out. So, I'm not sure if we want to close this bug, defer it, or something else. But I do think the time to do *something* is well in advance of that Fedora 40 release date. :-)
Also, another thought, but when the upstream work is finally ready, we should absolutely consider a Self-Contained Change proposal for introducing the Proton libraries and packages into a future major Fedora release. Maybe I am biased but I think it is significant enough to warrant a Change proposal and get more feedback, awareness, and eyes on this work too. As a Self-Contained Change though, it should be a lightweight process.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 39 development cycle. Changing version to 39.