Any reason why plague-client is not in EPEL? The SRPM from Fedora 7
seems to build just fine on EL5... I don't see it in the wish list
though, nor really any mention of it on the mailing list.

I must be missing something obvious here; seems like someone would have
added it by now (I'd be happy to do so as well)

Ray

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:22:46 -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:

> Any reason why plague-client is not in EPEL? The SRPM from Fedora 7
> seems to build just fine on EL5...

... and would not include any of the bug-fixes and improvements created
for the Extras/EPEL build servers. In Fedora, Plague is unmaintained. Some
tickets in bugzilla got lost during the mass-bug-triaging. So, that's not
a good starting-point for EPEL packages IMO.

It would be better to base off an EPEL package of my rpms or the
unofficial 0.4.5 [1] branch in cvs if you don't want so many separate
patches. The files and rpms can still be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mschwendt

[1] Note that in 0.4.5 I moved the builder_work default dir from /srv/...
to /var/lib/... in accordance with the Fedora guidelines. Old Fedora packages
used a non-working default in /tmp/builder_work.

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 07:05:14PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:22:46 -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
>
> > Any reason why plague-client is not in EPEL? The SRPM from Fedora 7
> > seems to build just fine on EL5...
>
> ... and would not include any of the bug-fixes and improvements created
> for the Extras/EPEL build servers. In Fedora, Plague is unmaintained. Some
> tickets in bugzilla got lost during the mass-bug-triaging. So, that's not
> a good starting-point for EPEL packages IMO.
>
> It would be better to base off an EPEL package of my rpms or the
> unofficial 0.4.5 [1] branch in cvs if you don't want so many separate
> patches. The files and rpms can still be found at:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mschwendt
>
> [1] Note that in 0.4.5 I moved the builder_work default dir from /srv/...
> to /var/lib/... in accordance with the Fedora guidelines. Old Fedora packages
> used a non-working default in /tmp/builder_work.

Thanks Michael. Good info. I built using your 0.4.5 RPM's on my EL5
machine without issue. A couple questions:

- I'd be happy to create an EL-5 branch based on your RPM's, that
would seem to make the most sense. But do you have any interest in
being the maintainer as you appear to be "upstream" in a way for
the 0.4.5 branch
- Where is this 0.4.5 CVS branch you mention?
- Off-topic for EPEL, but it seems like maybe we should update this
in Fedora 8 and 9 as well. I use those systems for building to
EPEL as well and the plague stuff in Fedora is still the Fedora 7
package.

Thanks again,
Ray

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:52:51 -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:

> Thanks Michael. Good info. I built using your 0.4.5 RPM's on my EL5
> machine without issue. A couple questions:
>
> - I'd be happy to create an EL-5 branch based on your RPM's, that
> would seem to make the most sense. But do you have any interest in
> being the maintainer as you appear to be "upstream" in a way for
> the 0.4.5 branch

That has become less interesting with the plans to migrate the EPEL
buildsys to koji. Production instances like buildsys.fedoraproject.org are
very valueable for stress-testing and for development of the software
(provided that they track upstream from time to time). Whether RPMFusion
will use Plague, I don't know. Livna still uses it, but the installation
there differs from EPEL/Extras buildsys (and I don't think an official
release or rpm-release is used).

Plague is also less interesting as bodhi and mash are made for koji.
Plague would benefit from actual development, such as completing the
feature additions in the 0.5.0 version (cvs head), further code reviewing
(also proof-reading), working on TODO lists, continueing with the
pushscripts or integrating them into a web app, and community-building --
without duplicating work on koji+bodhi'n'friends.

> - Where is this 0.4.5 CVS branch you mention?

In the old "fedora" cvs (most of those projects have moved to
fedora "hosted", afaik), tagged "Plague-0_4_5":
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/extras-buildsys/?root=fedora

With it the need for patches in the rpms is reduced to a minimum.

> - Off-topic for EPEL, but it seems like maybe we should update this
> in Fedora 8 and 9 as well. I use those systems for building to
> EPEL as well and the plague stuff in Fedora is still the Fedora 7
> package.

The differences to F7 and EPEL are only in the patches (different
version of mock, sqlite, +/- extras/epel buildsys customisations).

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list