On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 9:36 AM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 14. 04. 20 19:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 14. 04. 20 18:46, Troy Dawson wrote:
>> Yep, I'm having a hard time finding anything relevant to test.
>> I have verified it doesn't conflict with any other rpm macro, but I'm
>> pretty sure you had already checked that.
>> So, I'm giving it a thumbs up.
>> And I'll give it a thumbs up on the pull requests as well.
> EPEL 7 update and buildroot override:
> EPEL 8 update and buildroot override:
> I've disabled both time based and karma based push. We can observe the EPEL
> builds and decide whether to push this or not in ~1 month.
My EPEL 8 update got overridden by a new one.
Ya, sorry about the timing for that.
I kept your changes in, but I wanted something in override fairly
quick so packages that needed python could build.
I guess I should have just done the override, and not bodhi.
It's second nature for me to push things to bodhi when I build them so
I don't forget about them.
I haven't heard or seen any problems with your macros.
And what I have up there probably isn't going to be the final fix for
the python36/38 problem.
I've never un-updated anything, and I'm not sure if it will make it
possible for your packages to be pushed to stable.
But, if there is a simple way, I'm fine with pushing your updates out
to stable for epel8
I suggest I push the EPEL 7 one, there was no reported breakage.
> In case something is needed for EPEL 8 Playground, please do so,
I have no idea
> really, sorry about that.
Still no idea what is the story there.