devel-announce March 2017

devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org

6 participants
14 discussions

F27 Self Contained Change: True Noarch Erlang Packages
by Jan Kurik 06 Mar '17

06 Mar '17

= Proposed Self Contained Change: True Noarch Erlang Packages = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TrueNoarchErlangPackages Change owner(s): * Randy Barlow <bowlofeggs AT fedoraproject DOT org> Erlang packages are currently all installed into %{_libdir}/erlang/lib, despite most of them being noarch packages. This proposal is to modify Erlang to search %{_datadir}/erlang/lib in addition to %{_libdir}/erlang/lib when searching for dependencies. == Detailed Description == The Erlang VM is currently hardcoded to search for dependencies in %{_libdir}/erlang/lib (on x86_64 this is /usr/lib64/erlang/lib). Due to this, all Erlang packages are currently compiled "archful", despite most of them being pure Erlang and thus truly noarch. This leads to longer build times for Erlang packages, and more storage used in Koji and on the mirrors. This change proposes to add an additional path to be searched by the Erlang VM when finding dependencies at %{_datadir}/erlang/lib (on x86_64 this is /usr/share/erlang/lib). Additionally, the build macros will be udpated to automatically use this new path for installation for noarch packages. "Archful" packages will continue to store their files where they do today. == Scope == * Proposal owners: Write a small patch for the Erlang VM to search two paths instead of one when loading dependencies. We will attempt to get this patch accepted upstream first, but we will then carry the patch downstream until accepted by upstream. Modify the Erlang RPM macros to use the new path for noarch packages. * Other developers: Any developers who are not using the Erlang install RPM macro should modify their spec file to either use the macro, or to install their noarch packages to the new location. * Release engineering: #6685 (a check of an impact with Release Engineering is needed) We could mass-rebuild Erlang packages, but everything should keep working without doing a mass rebuild so it is probably not necessary or worthwhile, unless we want to more immediately clear up a little disk space. The recommendation is to wait until the next mass rebuild since there will be no interruptions for existing packages, i.e., no effort required from Releng. * List of deliverables: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Policies and guidelines: - Erlang packages do not have formal packaging guidelines yet, though this document does exist: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Peter/Erlang_Packaging_Guidelines - We should update the WIP guidelines. * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) -- Jan Kuřík Platform & Fedora Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

1 0

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines
by Jason L Tibbitts III 02 Mar '17

02 Mar '17

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. ---- The guidelines on versioning packages were completely rewritten in order to make them (hopefully) more comprehensible. This rewrite was not intended to introduce functional changes, but during the draft process the following small changes to the versioning scheme were approved by the committee and included in the rewrite: * Use of Version: 0 when upstream has not chosen a version. * Allowing "YYYYMMDD.commithash" (instead of requiring mention of the SCM in use) in the "snapshot information" field. * Explicit mention of the case where upstream uses invalid characters. * More detailed explanation of dealing with "unsortable" elements, instead of leaving many cases undefined. The examples were also split out of this page and placed in a new page which is outside of the protected Packaging hierarchy. The rewrite of this page is not yet complete at this time and I will be working on over the next several days, but assistance is most welcome. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Versioning_Examples * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/656 ----- The main guideline page has been updated to indicate that the Group: tag should not be used. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/679 ----- The section of the guidelines relating to spec files was reorganized. Outdated information was removed and a new section was added indicating the canonical status of the spec file in Fedora git repository. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_Files * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_Maintenance_and_Ca… * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/613 ----- A new section was added to the main guideline page with information on the differences between libraries and how packages which fall into both categories should be packaged. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Libraries_and_Applicati… * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/558 ----- The main guidelines section on file dependencies was amended to include information about directory dependencies, including a rule against depending on a directory in order to bring in any files or package functionality. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Depe… * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/632 ----- The Dependency Filtering guideline page was cleaned up a bit to remove outdated information about Perl filtering. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/591 ----- The example spec in the tmpfiles.d guidelines has been cleaned up. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/680 * https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/670

1 0

fedorahosted.org retired today (2017-03-01)
by Kevin Fenzi 01 Mar '17

01 Mar '17

Greetings. Today we have retired fedorahosted.org. Please see the following wiki page for up to date information: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Fedorahosted-retirement * ssh pushes will direct you to the above wiki page and not complete. * web access will redirect you to the above page. We hope you will look to https://pagure.io for your future source and issue hosting needs. Note that lists.fedorahosted.org is not affected by this and will continue moving forward. kevin

1 0

Fedora 26 Mass Branching
by Mohan Boddu 01 Mar '17

01 Mar '17

Hi All, Fedora 26 has now been branched, please be sure to do a git pull --rebase to pick up the new branch, as an additional reminder rawhide/f27 has been completely isolated from previous releases, so this means that anything you do for f26 you also have to do in the master branch and do a build there. There will be a Fedora 26 compose ASAP and it'll appear http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/26/ once complete. Please be sure to check it out. Bodhi is currently not active for Fedora 26, it will be enabled in a weeks time when we hit Alpha change freeze point in the Fedora 26 schedule[1]. Mohan Boddu. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/26/Schedule

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

devel-announce March 2017