9:36 a.m.
Hello,
am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in
rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26 (and
hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is
that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list of breaking
changes:
https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#breaking-changes
Here is a list of affected packages:
$ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to docker-py-2?
(This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time without CCs;
sorry if spamming)
Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all the changes
are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the update doesn't break
anything.
Cheers,
Tomas
10:40 a.m.
On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hello,
am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in
rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26 (and
hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is
that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list of breaking
changes:
https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#breaking-changes
Here is a list of affected packages:
$ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to docker-py-2?
(This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time without CCs;
sorry if spamming)
Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all the changes
are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the update doesn't break
anything.
Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
be more appropriate?
This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
after all ...
Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL extras?
11:02 a.m.
On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth <james.hogarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek
<ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in
> rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26 (and
> hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is
> that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list of breaking
> changes:
>
> https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#breaking-changes
>
>
> Here is a list of affected packages:
>
> $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
> atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
> docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
> flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
> python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
> python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
> python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
> python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
> python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
> python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
> python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
>
>
> Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to docker-py-2?
>
>
> (This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time without CCs;
> sorry if spamming)
>
> Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all the changes
> are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the update doesn't break
> anything.
>
>
Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
be more appropriate?
This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
after all ...
Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL extras?
Further to this looks like the F26 mass rebuild picked up this change
by accident ...
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=854128
At the very least you need a self-contained F26 FESCO change ticket for this ...
The correct procedure, given upstream has renamed, is to epoch bump
this back to 1.10 and then to do a package review for python-docker
though ...
3:28 a.m.
Quoting James Hogarth (2017-02-13 18:02:23)
On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth
<james.hogarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in
>> rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26
(and
>> hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is
>> that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list of breaking
>> changes:
>>
>> https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#breaking-changes
>>
>>
>> Here is a list of affected packages:
>>
>> $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
>> atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
>> docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
>> flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
>> python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
>>
>>
>> Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to docker-py-2?
>>
>>
>> (This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time without
CCs;
>> sorry if spamming)
>>
>> Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all the
changes
>> are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the update doesn't
break
>> anything.
>>
>>
>
> Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
> formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
> suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
> for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
> python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
> be more appropriate?
>
> This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
> after all ...
>
> Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL extras?
Further to this looks like the F26 mass rebuild picked up this change
by accident ...
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=854128
At the very least you need a self-contained F26 FESCO change ticket for this ...
The correct procedure, given upstream has renamed, is to epoch bump
this back to 1.10 and then to do a package review for python-docker
though ...
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Oh!
Thanks for letting me know.
The rename is actually a really good point. What bothers me is that upstream git
repo is still named docker-py, same for documentation. PyPI package is named
docker, as you pointed out. They even check if the 1.x series is installed:
https://github.com/docker/docker-py/blob/master/setup.py#L12
So let's rename then. I will submit new review. But first let's fix rawhide.
Regarding RHEL extras: not sure; first I want to make it happen in Fedora, then
wait for everyone to get used to it (especially atomic command). The thing is
that plenty of tools and scripts in RHEL ecosystem use this library. I don't
want to break those. If this bothers you, feel free to open bugzilla and we can
discuss there.
Thank you, James.
Tomas
5:24 a.m.
On 14 Feb 2017 09:28, "Tomas Tomecek" <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Quoting James Hogarth (2017-02-13 18:02:23)
On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth
<james.hogarth(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek
<ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x
series in
>> rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're
sure it gets
to F26 (and
>> hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason
this is
important is
>> that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a
list of
breaking
>> changes:
>>
>> https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#
breaking-changes
>>
>>
>> Here is a list of affected packages:
>>
>> $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
>> atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
>> docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
>> flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
>> python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
>>
>>
>> Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to
docker-py-2?
>>
>>
>> (This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time
without CCs;
>> sorry if spamming)
>>
>> Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all
the changes
>> are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the
update
doesn't break
>> anything.
>>
>>
>
> Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
> formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
> suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
> for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
> python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
> be more appropriate?
>
> This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
> after all ...
>
> Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL
extras?
Further to this looks like the F26 mass rebuild picked up this change
by accident ...
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=854128
At the very least you need a self-contained F26 FESCO change ticket for
this ...
The correct procedure, given upstream has renamed, is to epoch bump
this back to 1.10 and then to do a package review for python-docker
though ...
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Oh!
Thanks for letting me know.
The rename is actually a really good point. What bothers me is that
upstream git
repo is still named docker-py, same for documentation. PyPI package is named
docker, as you pointed out. They even check if the 1.x series is installed:
https://github.com/docker/docker-py/blob/master/setup.py#L12
So let's rename then. I will submit new review. But first let's fix rawhide.
Regarding RHEL extras: not sure; first I want to make it happen in Fedora,
then
wait for everyone to get used to it (especially atomic command). The thing
is
that plenty of tools and scripts in RHEL ecosystem use this library. I don't
want to break those. If this bothers you, feel free to open bugzilla and we
can
discuss there.
Thank you, James.
Tomas
No problem and great stuff
Feel free to cc me when you submit the review and I'll be happy to pick it
up.
I have scripts that use this in my workplace so useful to know when I might
need to update them :)
8:32 a.m.
On 14 Feb 2017 11:24, "James Hogarth" <james.hogarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 14 Feb 2017 09:28, "Tomas Tomecek" <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Quoting James Hogarth (2017-02-13 18:02:23)
On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth
<james.hogarth(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek
<ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x
series in
>> rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're
sure it gets
to F26 (and
>> hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason
this is
important is
>> that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a
list of
breaking
>> changes:
>>
>> https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#b
reaking-changes
>>
>>
>> Here is a list of affected packages:
>>
>> $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
>> atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
>> docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
>> flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
>> python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
>> python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
>> python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
>> python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
>>
>>
>> Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to
docker-py-2?
>>
>>
>> (This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time
without CCs;
>> sorry if spamming)
>>
>> Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all
the changes
>> are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the
update
doesn't break
>> anything.
>>
>>
>
> Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
> formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
> suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
> for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
> python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
> be more appropriate?
>
> This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
> after all ...
>
> Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL
extras?
Further to this looks like the F26 mass rebuild picked up this change
by accident ...
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=854128
At the very least you need a self-contained F26 FESCO change ticket for
this ...
The correct procedure, given upstream has renamed, is to epoch bump
this back to 1.10 and then to do a package review for python-docker
though ...
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Oh!
Thanks for letting me know.
The rename is actually a really good point. What bothers me is that
upstream git
repo is still named docker-py, same for documentation. PyPI package is named
docker, as you pointed out. They even check if the 1.x series is installed:
https://github.com/docker/docker-py/blob/master/setup.py#L12
So let's rename then. I will submit new review. But first let's fix rawhide.
Regarding RHEL extras: not sure; first I want to make it happen in Fedora,
then
wait for everyone to get used to it (especially atomic command). The thing
is
that plenty of tools and scripts in RHEL ecosystem use this library. I don't
want to break those. If this bothers you, feel free to open bugzilla and we
can
discuss there.
Thank you, James.
Tomas
No problem and great stuff
Feel free to cc me when you submit the review and I'll be happy to pick it
up.
I have scripts that use this in my workplace so useful to know when I might
need to update them :)
I see you've submitted the review request
I've grabbed it and will do the review this evening.
9:26 a.m.
On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 14:32 +0000, James Hogarth wrote:
On 14 Feb 2017 11:24, "James Hogarth"
<james.hogarth(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 14 Feb 2017 09:28, "Tomas Tomecek" <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Quoting James Hogarth (2017-02-13 18:02:23)
> On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth <james.hogarth(a)gmail.co
> m>
wrote:
> > On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek <ttomecek(a)redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series
> > > to 2.x
series in
> > > rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it
> > > gets
to F26 (and
> > > hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this
> > > is
important is
> > > that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list
> > > of
breaking
> > > changes:
> > >
> > > https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#b
reaking-changes
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is a list of affected packages:
> > >
> > > $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
> > > atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
> > > docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
> > > flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
> > > python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
> > > python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
> > > python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
> > > python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
> > > python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
> > > python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
> > > python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
> > >
> > >
> > > Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to
docker-py-2?
> > >
> > >
> > > (This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this
> > > time
without CCs;
> > > sorry if spamming)
> > >
> > > Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package
> > > and all
the changes
> > > are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the
> > > update
doesn't break
> > > anything.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
> > formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
> > suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package
> > review
> > for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
> > python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting)
> > would
> > be more appropriate?
> >
> > This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python
> > module
> > after all ...
> >
> > Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0
> > in RHEL
extras?
>
> Further to this looks like the F26 mass rebuild picked up this
> change
> by accident ...
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=854128
>
> At the very least you need a self-contained F26 FESCO change ticket
> for
this ...
>
> The correct procedure, given upstream has renamed, is to epoch bump
> this back to 1.10 and then to do a package review for python-docker
> though ...
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Oh!
Thanks for letting me know.
The rename is actually a really good point. What bothers me is that
upstream git
repo is still named docker-py, same for documentation. PyPI package
is named
docker, as you pointed out. They even check if the 1.x series is
installed:
https://github.com/docker/docker-py/blob/master/setup.py#L12
So let's rename then. I will submit new review. But first let's fix
rawhide.
Regarding RHEL extras: not sure; first I want to make it happen in
Fedora,
then
wait for everyone to get used to it (especially atomic command). The
thing
is
that plenty of tools and scripts in RHEL ecosystem use this library.
I don't
want to break those. If this bothers you, feel free to open bugzilla
and we
can
discuss there.
Thank you, James.
Tomas
No problem and great stuff
Feel free to cc me when you submit the review and I'll be happy to
pick it
up.
I have scripts that use this in my workplace so useful to know when I
might
need to update them :)
I see you've submitted the review request
I've grabbed it and will do the review this evening.
Can you stop using HTML
please? It makes all messages just to loose
quoting which makes messages unreadable...
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
-Igor Gnatenko
4:43 a.m.
New subject: python-docker is in rawhide (was Re: heads up: update of python-docker-py to
2.x in rawhide)
I just built python-docker in rawhide.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=860378
The biggest change is that `python-docker` does NOT provide `python-docker-py`,
this means two things:
1. You can't have both packages installed.
2. You can still use `python-docker-py`.
3. You should switch to `python-docker`.
python-docker-py will receive NO further updates. You can still use it, but
upstream won't release anything new.
As James Hogarth pointed out [1], since the version 2 is not backwards
compatible with version 1, version 2 can't provide version 1. Hopefully, we'll
be able to retire version 1 in Fedora 27.
Please update your specfiles (and requirements.txt files) to point to version 2.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422198#c7
Feel free to get in touch if you have any questions or comments.
Regards,
Tomas
2644
days inactive
2651
days old
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Igor Gnatenko -
James Hogarth -
Tomas Tomecek