----- Original Message -----
> Hi all,
> I know I've been promising this for quite some time to several people,
so I
> finally managed to put together a proposal for packaging Python 3 in
EPEL 7
> (it'd also scale to EPEL 6 for that matter).
> I've created a wiki page [1] with the proposal and I'd like to hear
comments
> and thoughts on it. There are some TODOs and variants in few places - I'd
> like to hear your opinions on these, or perhaps suggestions on better
> approaches.
> I'll create new documents with the updated proposal at some points
during the
> discussion, so that people can easily see where the proposal is going
> without having to compare wiki revisions.
>
> Is there any other list/interested parties that should be put in CC of
this
> mail? If so, please feel free to respond and do that yourself.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Regards,
> Slavek Kabrda
>
> [1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3
Let's reiterate:
- Nick Coghlan posted an interesting proposal to the discussion section in
my proposal (my reaction is in the blue frame) [1]. I'd appreciate more
comments on this.
- From the feedback gathered on this list:
- We should have /usr/bin/python3 pointing to a python3X build. The
question is which one this will be during transitional periods between 3X
and 3X+1. My thinking is that we should point /usr/bin/python3 to 3X+1 at
the time of retiring 3X (IMO there is no ideal time to do that, so it's not
really important).
- As for dist-git possibilities, Orion would prefer to use current
dist-git repos with epel-7 branches. It's not my preference (for reasons
mentioned in the proposal), but I'm not against it if that is what others
wish.
- Stephen Smoogen mentioned that the transitional period during which
python3X and python3X+1 exist can be anywhere from 6 weeks to 2 months. I'm
starting to think that we should only specify the minimum time for which 3X
will be kept. So my proposal would be sth. like "3X is kept for minimum of
6 weeks in parallel to 3X+1. After this, it is retired as soon as all
stakeholders have rebuilt against 3X+1." (keeping it a bit vague is a good
thing here, I think)
- As I noted in one of my emails, we don't have to worry about conflicts
with RHSCL. New collections from RHSCL will be named with "rh-" prefix and
thus won't conflict with python3X stacks.
Since it doesn't seem that there was anything very problematic, let's
discuss the points mentioned above after which I should be able to finalize
the proposal and make it official (and then we could all get to building
:)).
I'm quite sure that we'll still hit some technical issues, e.g. macro
naming for parallel stacks, but I believe we can discuss and solve these on
the way.
Thank you for circling back on this. I was going to try and contact you
today about python26 which is orphaned in EPEL-5 and was going to see if we
could use the same logic for making a python27 tree for EL5 and EL6?
Thanks.
--
Regards,
Slavek Kabrda
[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_talk:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3#Sharing_Pa...
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel