search

fedora-copr / copr

RPM build system - upstream for https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/
115 stars 62 forks source link

The "stable" vs. "next" EPEL 10 repository variants in Copr? #3469

Open praiskup opened 4 days ago

praiskup commented 4 days ago

There's the Mock issue https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/1427 that discusses how to work with the future EPEL minor versions. We should consider the approach for Fedora Copr.

I think I'm sure we don't want to have epel-10.0-*, 10.1, ... variants in Copr. We probably want to have two epel variants, one for the RHEL users (building against the latest released minor) and one for CentOS Stream users (building against the next minor, previously called "epel next").

I don't think it matters much how we name the build targets (the chroot selection form self-documents the options). The problem I think is what happens after dnf copr enable <user/project> on C10S and RHEL 10 (and other EL variants).

praiskup commented 4 days ago

We could have rhel+epel-10-x86_64 (stable) chroot in Copr, then centos-stream+epel-10-x86_64 (next), but then the question is what to do with epel-10-x86_64 chroot. Also, the dnf5 copr enable implements fallback mechanism, I'm curious if C10S or RHEL users want to do any fallbacks to the counterpart repo or not.

FrostyX commented 2 days ago

I think I'm sure we don't want to have epel-10.0-*, 10.1, ... variants in Copr.

Yeah, that sounds horrible for so many different reasons

I don't think it matters much how we name the build targets

Agreed. Also, we have a feature for creating aliases, so renaming them if needed, shouldn't be hard

We could have rhel+epel-10-x86_64 (stable) chroot in Copr, then centos-stream+epel-10-x86_64 (next)

Makes sense to me

but then the question is what to do with epel-10-x86_64 chroot

I would probably do the same thing that you did in Mock and not have epel-10-x86_64 at all.

praiskup commented 5 hours ago

I would probably do the same thing that you did in Mock and not have epel-10-x86_64 at all.

Even if In Fedora Koji still has epel-10 (has some default meaning)? E.g., koji mock-config --target epel10 --arch x86_64 which is C10S + EPEL "next". I think I still tend to have as close defaults as possible to normal Fedora.