Hey guys,
Long time lurker, who wants to try and get more involved with Stephen's shifting responsibilities. Is there a "getting started" or "hey new guy don't E-mail the mailing list" approach to contributing to this? I've heard Stephen refer to a COPR every now and then -- I'm aware of the COPR at [1] which I forked into my own COPR, and then also the wiki [2] with basic information on actually using Node.JS in Fedora. The packaging Node.JS page [3] looks severely outdated, since we are now no longer attempting to RPM package each individual NPM dependency and instead using that built in process? (That was a question)
The other part I'm confused on is that the COPR shows the build was triggered by a SRPM that was uploaded [4], but then also refers to a git repository at [5]
I wanted to "cut my teeth" on trying to configure the COPR to do a Fedora 23 build, since I'm still on Fedora 23. How would I go about doing that? As I said I forked the COPR and activated Fedora 23 as an option, would I need to upload my own SRPM based on the git repository, or should I be setting it up to pull automagically from elsewhere?
[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/nodejs-sig/coprs/ [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Node.js [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js [4] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/nodejs-sig/nodejs-lts/build/181534...
[5] http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/@nodejs-sig/nodejs-lts/nodejs...
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:38 AM Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/27/2016 04:19 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 27/04/16 03:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
As for Option 1)? I think someone with more knowledge of the individual
modules
in Fedora (Tom Hughes? Jared Smith?) would need to figure out how many
modules
would be broken if we downgraded. If it's sufficiently small, I suppose
we could
epoch-bump nodejs and its virtual npm Provides: and go that route. I
don't love
that we will effectively been playing yo-yo with the version in F24,
but it
would be a solution...
Off the top of my head I'm not aware of anything that requires 5.x and
for the
most part I think people try to support at least 4.x and 5.x at the
moment, and
often earlier versions as well.
Tom
OK, I did some repoquery magic just now and came up with (unique-only):
nodejs(engine) nodejs(engine) >= 0.1 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.12 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.15 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.3 nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.36 nodejs(engine) >= 0.1.103 nodejs(engine) >= 0.12.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.1.90 nodejs(engine) > 0.1.90 nodejs(engine) >= 0.2.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.2.0-0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.2.4 nodejs(engine) >= 0.2.5 nodejs(engine) >= 0.3.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.3.1 nodejs(engine) >= 0.3.6 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4. nodejs(engine) >= 0.4.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4.1 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4.2 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4.7 nodejs(engine) >= 0.4.9 nodejs(engine) >= 0.6 nodejs(engine) >= 0.6.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.6.19 nodejs(engine) >= 0.6.3 nodejs(engine) >= 0.6.6 nodejs(engine) >= 0.8 nodejs(engine) >= 0.8. nodejs(engine) >= 0.8.0 nodejs(engine) >= 0.8.19 nodejs(engine) >= 0.9.0 nodejs(engine) >= 4 nodejs(engine) >= 4.0.0
So according to this, we have nothing in the package collection that is known to require only 5.x or later. So that's a point in favor of the 4.x downgrade approach.
I don't love the idea of regressing the versions post-Beta, but it's starting to look like the least-risky approach. We really have no idea what is going to be broken by 6.0 and I don't want to stick some poor volunteer with maintaining backports of a dead upstream release.
nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org