[Fedora-packaging] SCL -- buildtime information

[Toshio Kuratomi]

I had a chance to talk with dgilmore last week about building SCLs.  From
the conversation it seems that it will probably be harder to build SCLs in
Fedora than it is inside of RH.  Here's the summary:

There's two models that we can choose from:

* Building to separate targets per scl.  For that model you can have
  a separate branch per scl.  This is more or less the style that's being
  used inside of RH.  However, in Fedora land this would mean that we need
  to have seperate yum repos per scl, seperate bodhi updates targets, and some
  way to add repo files to systems for each scl.
  - Note: there may be additional work as well.  dgilmore asked whether the
    SCL model is to build once for the oldest supported OS release and then
    that SCL build will run on any newer OS release.  If that's not the case (I
    didn't think it was but confirmation would be nice) then you'd need to
    have separate yum/bodhi/etc for every $SCL-$OSRelease combination.

* Instead we could build for the main Fedora Repo.  If we do this, the spec
  file, git repo name, and srpm package name all need to match.  That means
  we'd have a separate git-level package for each package+scl combination.
  So if we had scl-php5.6 and we needed a php and php-gettext package for it
  we'd need separate git-level packages named scl-php5.6-php and
  scl-php5.6-php-gettext.

dgilmore did say he'd like to test if there might be a way to separate
targets building to the same tag.  If he could figure out a way to do that
it might allow us to have the packages stored in separate branches but build
them for the same yum repositories (which might allow us to skip the
separate bodhi targets as well).  He'd need time to get an infrastructure
setup to test this, though, so it would take a good deal of time (for
instance if we're delaying F21 in order to do releng work, this might be
a project for that time.)


After talking with him, my recommendation would be to have separate
packages.  That allows us to get scls built in Fedora sooner.  Otherwise we
won't be able to do anything with them until the fedora.next Outer Rings
become viable.  I'm not anticipating that we'd have many SCLs to begin with
so we'd hopefully be able to migrate those SCLs that we build at first into
whatever form things take in the future.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20131007/b307c203/attachment.sig>