fix jaxlib py-build-cmake broken labels

[ngam]

Guidelines for marking packages as broken:

• We prefer to patch the repo data (see here) instead of marking packages as broken. This alternative workflow makes environments more reproducible.
• Packages with requirements/metadata that are too strict but otherwise work are not technically broken and should not be marked as such.
• Packages with missing metadata can be marked as broken on a temporary basis but should be patched in the repo data and be marked unbroken later.
• In some cases where the number of users of a package is small or it is used by the maintainers only, we can allow packages to be marked broken more liberally.
• We (conda-forge/core) try to make a decision on these requests within 24 hours.

What will happen when a package is marked broken?

• Our bots will add the broken label to the package. The main label will remain on the package and this is normal.
• Our bots will rebuild our repodata patches to remove this package from the repodata.
• In a few hours after the anaconda.org CDN picks up the new patches, you will no longer be able to install the package from the main channel.

Checklist:

• [x] I want to mark a package as broken (or not broken):

  • [x] Added a description of the problem with the package in the PR description.
  • [ ] Pinged the team for the package for their input.

• [ ] I want to archive a feedstock:

  • [ ] Pinged the team for that feedstock for their input.
  • [ ] Make sure you have opened an issue on the feedstock explaining why it was archived.
  • [ ] Linked that issue in this PR description.
  • [ ] Added links to any other relevant issues/PRs in the PR description.

• [ ] I want to request (or revoke) access to an opt-in CI resource:

  • [ ] Pinged the relevant feedstock team(s)
  • [ ] Added a small description explaining why access is needed

• [ ] I want to copy an artifact following CFEP-3:

  • [ ] Pinged the relevant feedstock team(s)
  • [ ] Added a reference to the original PR
  • [ ] Posted a link to the conda artifacts
  • [ ] Posted a link to the build logs

The following PRs used the outdated method to mark packages as broken. This PR correct that. Could @isuruf take a quick Look? Thanks!

cc @conda-forge/core

• https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/1056
• https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/1044

[traversaro]

Thanks @ngam! Just to understand, what was wrong in https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/1050 ?

[ngam]

Thanks @ngam! Just to understand, what was wrong in https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/1050 ?

Sometime like 6 months ago, the procedure for changed for requesting these types of admin requests was changed... I too was surprised and it took me a bit of reading (the readme file) to realize what went wrong...

[traversaro]

Thanks @ngam! Just to understand, what was wrong in #1050 ?

Sometime like 6 months ago, the procedure for changed for requesting these types of admin requests was changed... I too was surprised and it took me a bit of reading (the readme file) to realize what went wrong...

Ah, thanks for noticing! Indeed I used the new format in https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/971 and https://github.com/conda-forge/admin-requests/pull/994, not sure why I got it wrong this time.