Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has already taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module definitions plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com... .
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to production.
Regards,
Merlin
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:59 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has already taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module definitions plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com....
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to production.
Regards,
Merlin
I'm not a person who can approve, but it looks good to me. Troy
On 9/10/19 1:57 PM, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has already taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module definitions plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com... .
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to production.
Looks ok to me. +1
kevin
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On 9/10/19 1:57 PM, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has already taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module definitions plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com... .
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to production.
Looks ok to me. +1
Same here. +1
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:28 AM Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On 9/10/19 1:57 PM, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has
already
taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module
definitions
plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com...
.
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to
production.
Looks ok to me. +1
Same here. +1
Since this seems to be well received so far, here's a patch with platform:el8-playground...
Merlin
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 12:01 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:28 AM Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On 9/10/19 1:57 PM, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Please review the attached patch to add a new file to https://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/.
This patch provides a new platform:el8 default module definition so fm-orchestrator knows about EPEL8. Some review and discussion has
already
taken place at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40
.
The contents are based on the current Fedora platform module
definitions
plus the rpm profiles from the package groups found in
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/epel8-infra-build/latest/groups/com...
.
Note: I'm starting with just this platform:el8 module definition for staging MBS. Once we're happy with it, it can be replicated for platform:el8-playground. Then, when ready, they can be copied to
production.
Looks ok to me. +1
Same here. +1
Since this seems to be well received so far, here's a patch with platform:el8-playground...
Merlin
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does something else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi configs.)
Thanks.
Merlin
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does something else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does
something
else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi
configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does
something
else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi
configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does
something
else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi
configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
Now that the build tags have been created (thanks, Mohan!), we should be ready to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS.
I have attached a revised patch that includes both the el8 and el8-playground definitions in a single patch file. Aside from the combined patch, the only difference from the previous separate patches is the addition of the 'default_modules_scm_url' and 'use_default_modules' settings to enable ursa prime.
Thanks.
Merlin
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:07 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does
something
else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi
configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
Hi,
I created the tags as module-epel8-build and module-epel8-playground-build just to be consistent with the naming, so you need to change the config for koji_tag part.
And may be also change the "stream" in the yaml file to epel8 and epel8-playground and change the name of the platform to platform-epel8 and platform-epel8-playground, again just for consistency.
Other than that, its LGTM.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:43 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Now that the build tags have been created (thanks, Mohan!), we should be ready to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS.
I have attached a revised patch that includes both the el8 and el8-playground definitions in a single patch file. Aside from the combined patch, the only difference from the previous separate patches is the addition of the 'default_modules_scm_url' and 'use_default_modules' settings to enable ursa prime.
Thanks.
Merlin
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:07 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote:
Hi, all,
Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does
something
else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi
configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:32 PM Mohan Boddu mboddu@bhujji.com wrote:
Hi,
I created the tags as module-epel8-build and module-epel8-playground-build just to be consistent with the naming, so you need to change the config for koji_tag part.
And may be also change the "stream" in the yaml file to epel8 and epel8-playground and change the name of the platform to platform-epel8 and platform-epel8-playground, again just for consistency.
Other than that, its LGTM.
Thanks for taking a look.
There was discussion about the "el8" vs "epel8" naming during the preliminary review and discussion. It should be "el8" to work correctly with RHEL 8 as explained in Petr's comment at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40#comment-96326.
But yeah, it keeps tripping me up, too!
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:43 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Now that the build tags have been created (thanks, Mohan!), we should be ready to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS.
I have attached a revised patch that includes both the el8 and el8-playground definitions in a single patch file. Aside from the combined patch, the only difference from the previous separate patches is the addition of the 'default_modules_scm_url' and 'use_default_modules' settings to enable ursa prime.
Thanks.
Merlin
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:07 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote: > Hi, all, > > Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module > definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does something > else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on > platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi configs.)
I'm not entirely sure. :)
Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here?
kevin _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
Thanks for the info, I renamed the tags and updated the tickets.
Why is naming so hard?
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:58 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:32 PM Mohan Boddu mboddu@bhujji.com wrote:
Hi,
I created the tags as module-epel8-build and module-epel8-playground-build just to be consistent with the naming, so you need to change the config for koji_tag part.
And may be also change the "stream" in the yaml file to epel8 and epel8-playground and change the name of the platform to platform-epel8 and platform-epel8-playground, again just for consistency.
Other than that, its LGTM.
Thanks for taking a look.
There was discussion about the "el8" vs "epel8" naming during the preliminary review and discussion. It should be "el8" to work correctly with RHEL 8 as explained in Petr's comment at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40#comment-96326.
But yeah, it keeps tripping me up, too!
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:43 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Now that the build tags have been created (thanks, Mohan!), we should be ready to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS.
I have attached a revised patch that includes both the el8 and el8-playground definitions in a single patch file. Aside from the combined patch, the only difference from the previous separate patches is the addition of the 'default_modules_scm_url' and 'use_default_modules' settings to enable ursa prime.
Thanks.
Merlin
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:07 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi, Matt, Jan,
Could one of you provide some input here?
We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to happen before merging and deploying them?
If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached to this message so you don't need to go digging.
Merlin
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote: > > Hi, all, > > > > Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module > > definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does > something > > else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on > > platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi > configs.) > > I'm not entirely sure. :) > > Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here? > > kevin > _______________________________________________ > infrastructure mailing list -- > infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro... >
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:51 PM Mohan Boddu mboddu@bhujji.com wrote:
Thanks for the info, I renamed the tags and updated the tickets.
Thank you for noticing the discrepancy and making the corrections.
Now we should definitely be good to import the virtual module definitions.
Why is naming so hard?
Because communication is hard!
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:58 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:32 PM Mohan Boddu mboddu@bhujji.com wrote:
Hi,
I created the tags as module-epel8-build and module-epel8-playground-build just to be consistent with the naming, so you need to change the config for koji_tag part.
And may be also change the "stream" in the yaml file to epel8 and epel8-playground and change the name of the platform to platform-epel8 and platform-epel8-playground, again just for consistency.
Other than that, its LGTM.
Thanks for taking a look.
There was discussion about the "el8" vs "epel8" naming during the preliminary review and discussion. It should be "el8" to work correctly with RHEL 8 as explained in Petr's comment at https://pagure.io/Fedora-Infra/ansible/pull-request/40#comment-96326.
But yeah, it keeps tripping me up, too!
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:43 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Now that the build tags have been created (thanks, Mohan!), we should be ready to add the virtual platform module definitions for EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS.
I have attached a revised patch that includes both the el8 and el8-playground definitions in a single patch file. Aside from the combined patch, the only difference from the previous separate patches is the addition of the 'default_modules_scm_url' and 'use_default_modules' settings to enable ursa prime.
Thanks.
Merlin
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:07 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Matt Prahl mprahl@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Merlin, I can't think of anything that you need to do before merging and deploying them as long as the Koji tags mentioned in the modulemd files are all set.
Of course. We need the module-el8-build and module-el8-playground-build tags. I just created https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8865 for that.
Thanks, Matt!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com
wrote:
> Hi, Matt, Jan, > > Could one of you provide some input here? > > We're looking to add the virtual platform module definitions for > EPEL-8 to Fedora staging MBS. Is there anything specific that needs to > happen before merging and deploying them? > > If you'd like to review the definitions, the patches are re-attached > to this message so you don't need to go digging. > > Merlin > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:43 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:14:14PM -0500, Merlin Mathesius wrote: >> > Hi, all, >> > >> > Since folks seem to be happy with the el8 platform virtual module >> > definitions, can they be merged and deployed to staging--or does >> something >> > else need to happen first? (Of course, any module builds based on >> > platform:el8* won't be usable until there are corresponding pungi >> configs.) >> >> I'm not entirely sure. :) >> >> Can we ask some of the mbs folks what all is needed here? >> >> kevin >> _______________________________________________ >> infrastructure mailing list -- >> infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to >> infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org >> Fedora Code of Conduct: >> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ >> List Guidelines: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines >> List Archives: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro... >> >
--
Matt Prahl
Senior Software Engineer, PnT DevOps
Red Hat https://www.redhat.com/
Westford, MA
mprahl@redhat.com M: 802-999-0972 IM: mprahl https://red.ht/sig
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Kevin Fenzi -
Matt Prahl -
Merlin Mathesius -
Mohan Boddu -
Stephen Gallagher -
Troy Dawson