Would it be possible to branch and build python-urlib3 (with extras) in EPEL10? I've done some tests locally on 10 and in mockbuild. As pysocks was added recently (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2390255) we can also enable extras, except for h2 that is missing. Tests sadly still miss some deps (albeit only quart and quart-trio, maybe we could ask these to be built for EPEL as well? but didn't investigate the dependency chain yet) I would be happy to help as co-maintainer if you don't have time to follow it (FAS: fedepell) Many thanks! F. Reproducible: Always
This package is already in RHEL10[1], so it is not eligible for inclusion in EPEL10. If it were important enough, it might be possible to create a python3-urllib-epel package with its version aligned to the RHEL10 package, and adjust it so that it *only* ships the “missing” extras metapackages. I’m not sure there is precedent for doing that solely for Python extras metapackages, but it would seem to be allowed[2]. I don’t think I’m interested in doing it myself, though. > Tests sadly still miss some deps (albeit only quart and quart-trio, maybe we could ask these to be built for EPEL as well? I maintain both of these in Fedora, along with python-hypercorn, upon which they depend. I would be happy to branch them all to EPEL10 if their dependencies were satisfied. Currently, python-hypercorn is missing at least python-aioquic and python-priority. [1] https://tiny.distro.builders/view-rpm--view-c10s--python3-urllib3.html [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-missing-sub-packages/
Thanks a lot Ben for the fast feedback! Sorry for overseeing that it was moved to RHEL10! Just to give some context: I was trying to have python-selenium (which is one of the many, slowly progressing, dependencies to have django) in EPEL10, which: ``` Problem 2: nothing provides requested (python3dist(urllib3[socks]) < 3~~ with python3dist(urllib3[socks]) >= 1.26) ``` I was surprised to not have (one of the two versions of) django in EPEL10/RHEL10 but so it seems (maybe rising this here will get me corrected :) ). WRT tests: I guess RHEL10 cannot depend on Fedora, so without these too being moved in RHEL it would still not work, right? Besides if we would do this proposed extras-only package for EPEL and run tests there, if that makes sense. I don't know if doing this python3-urlib-epel that packages just the extras is worth tho, as now we would have a new, EPEL only package for those. Will also check if selenium requirement in case can be relaxed Many thanks again for the fast and precious feedback! F.
> I’m not sure there is precedent for doing that solely for Python extras metapackages... https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-jsonschema-epel/blob/epel10/f/python-jsonschema-epel.spec
> Will also check if selenium requirement in case can be relaxed It can likely be patched for a direct requirement on urllib3 + pysocks.
Created attachment 2105720 [details] A working specfile This is a working specfile forged from c10s with stripped changelog. It builds successfully in epel10 with python3-pytest-freezegun from f40.
Created attachment 2105721 [details] Specfile diff from c10s
s/forged/forked/
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d28b99290e (python-urllib3-epel-1.26.19-2.el10_2) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.2. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d28b99290e
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d28b99290e has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d28b99290e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d28b99290e (python-urllib3-epel-1.26.19-2.el10_2) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Thanks Miro!