Perl Report

[Michael Stahnke]

After the last meeting, I was tasked with finding out what was missing
in terms of Perl package in EPEL.

Thanks to cweyl and some discussion on #fedora-devel we now have a
report that is amazing.

http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/

Again, thanks to cweyl for the wicked-good layout of this report.

Now it's time for some analysis of the data and to see what we can do
to get more packages into EPEL.

stahnma

[Manuel Wolfshant]

On 07/20/2008 03:39 AM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> After the last meeting, I was tasked with finding out what was missing
> in terms of Perl package in EPEL.
>
> Thanks to cweyl and some discussion on #fedora-devel we now have a
> report that is amazing.
>
> http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/
>
> Again, thanks to cweyl for the wicked-good layout of this report.
>
> Now it's time for some analysis of the data and to see what we can do
> to get more packages into EPEL.

A couple of months ago I wanted to install bugzilla from EL-4 but I 
found out that a bunch of perl modules were missing (actually bugzilla 
needed one module which in turn needed others and via a looooooooooooong 
dependency chain I ended up building 13 packages which were missing at 
the time from EL-4). In the end I was stuck because a certain feature 
(really, I do not remember which one :( ) was provided by perl-5.8.8 but 
not by the stock perl [-5.8.5] which is provided by Centos 4.
    Comparing my internal repo with the list from 
http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/ I notice that I have 
successfully built perl-Image-Size-3.1-3,  perl-Text-Autoformat-1.14.0-3 
and perl-Text-Reform-1.12.2-5. All of them seem to have been built 
cleanly, except for the last one for which I have disabled %check (the 
entry I have added to the changelog at the time says " all tests fail 
due to missing version.pm").
    So here comes issue number 1: if someone with more knowledge in perl 
can verify my packages, I can happily provide them (so as to save the 
building time) and if they are OK, could we bump the EPEL versions ?
    Issue number 2: AFAIK, perl-5.8.8 is NOT available in the stock 
distro but from the more advanced Application Stack. Am I wrong here ?//

wolfy (who has just come back from vacation)

PS: Who is the person responsible with building the report (Chris ?) ? 
It's a nice piece of work but it needs a bit of fixing, since some 
modules which are available in F-9/rawhide are obviously missing from 
the list. Starting with perl itself...

[Michael Stahnke]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 8:12 PM, Manuel Wolfshant
 wrote:
> On 07/20/2008 03:39 AM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> > After the last meeting, I was tasked with finding out what was missing
> > in terms of Perl package in EPEL.
> >
> > Thanks to cweyl and some discussion on #fedora-devel we now have a
> > report that is amazing.
> >
> > http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/
> >
> > Again, thanks to cweyl for the wicked-good layout of this report.
> >
> > Now it's time for some analysis of the data and to see what we can do
> > to get more packages into EPEL.
>
> A couple of months ago I wanted to install bugzilla from EL-4 but I found
> out that a bunch of perl modules were missing (actually bugzilla needed one
> module which in turn needed others and via a looooooooooooong dependency
> chain I ended up building 13 packages which were missing at the time from
> EL-4). In the end I was stuck because a certain feature (really, I do not
> remember which one :( ) was provided by perl-5.8.8 but not by the stock perl
> [-5.8.5] which is provided by Centos 4.
>   Comparing my internal repo with the list from
> http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/ I notice that I have successfully
> built perl-Image-Size-3.1-3,  perl-Text-Autoformat-1.14.0-3 and
> perl-Text-Reform-1.12.2-5. All of them seem to have been built cleanly,
> except for the last one for which I have disabled %check (the entry I have
> added to the changelog at the time says " all tests fail due to missing
> version.pm").
>   So here comes issue number 1: if someone with more knowledge in perl can
> verify my packages, I can happily provide them (so as to save the building
> time) and if they are OK, could we bump the EPEL versions ?
>   Issue number 2: AFAIK, perl-5.8.8 is NOT available in the stock distro but
> from the more advanced Application Stack. Am I wrong here ?//
>   wolfy (who has just come back from vacation)
>
>
> PS: Who is the person responsible with building the report (Chris ?) ? It's
> a nice piece of work but it needs a bit of fixing, since some modules which
> are available in F-9/rawhide are obviously missing from the list. Starting
> with perl itself...
>
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

I probably should have prefaced this.  This is a test.  It is a work
in progress.  cweyl has graciously helped us out (in only a couple
days) and come with this thus far.  The data could contain
errors/omissions/etc.  The code is in fedorahosted at
https://fedorahosted.org/camelus/  .  I don't know if he has put the
latest changes up there yet or not.

Our next step is now to figure out what to do with the packges that
are not built/branched for EPEL.  We probably need to ping
maintainers, give them about a week or so to respond, and if they
don't, ask to be co-maintainers in EPEL.  We might need some
volunteers for this too.

stahnma

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 07:39:32PM -0500, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> After the last meeting, I was tasked with finding out what was missing
> in terms of Perl package in EPEL.
>
> Thanks to cweyl and some discussion on #fedora-devel we now have a
> report that is amazing.
>
> http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/

There are some that are missing, for example for my packages,
perl-Algorithm-CurveFit seems to be in F-9 and devel too.

Also there is one that is listed in EL-4, perl-Test-Distribution
but doesn't seems to be here?

I always have found that report very interesting too.

--
Pat

[Steven Pritchard]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 07:39:32PM -0500, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> Thanks to cweyl and some discussion on #fedora-devel we now have a
> report that is amazing.
>
> http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/perl/
>
> Again, thanks to cweyl for the wicked-good layout of this report.

Nice, although I think it might be wrong on a lot of F-9 and rawhide
packages.  There's an awful lot of stuff either missing or with ancient
versions that can't be right.

Oh, and FWIW, there's a #fedora-perl, although it doesn't get used much.
(That really should change...)
> Now it's time for some analysis of the data and to see what we can do
> to get more packages into EPEL.

Did anyone ever figure out what to do about Archive::Zip?  That's
blocking a lot of what I'd like to work on...

Steve