In a week or two, I'll merge the "fixes #4841 - add tfm SCL source
package" PR and begin a mass-rebuild of our RPMs in nightly tags. This
will cause all "ruby193" prefixes to be changed to "tfm", in names and
inter-package dependencies.
Lots more info in the description there and in the linked YouTube
recording from a while back.
This'll be very disruptive to packagers while it's happening, so I'll
wait for the current set of active foreman-packaging PRs to be closed
first. New plugin releases will probably have to wait it out, or go to
rpm/1.9 in some cases.
I'll also be clearing out any old ruby193-* packages in the nightly
tags, so they should only contain tfm-* and core packages in the main
nightly tag and rubygem-* packages in the nonscl nightly tag.
I'll drop another e-mail to the list before starting. Thanks for your
patience.
I'll be starting this tomorrow, Tuesday 25th Aug. RPM nightlies will be
paused until it's all complete and PRs to foreman-packaging rpm/develop
will be disrupted.
···
On 17/08/15 14:50, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> In a week or two, I'll merge the "fixes #4841 - add tfm SCL source
> package" PR and begin a mass-rebuild of our RPMs in nightly tags. This
> will cause all "ruby193" prefixes to be changed to "tfm", in names and
> inter-package dependencies.
>
> https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/pull/249
>
> Lots more info in the description there and in the linked YouTube
> recording from a while back.
>
> This'll be very disruptive to packagers while it's happening, so I'll
> wait for the current set of active foreman-packaging PRs to be closed
> first. New plugin releases will probably have to wait it out, or go to
> rpm/1.9 in some cases.
>
> I'll also be clearing out any old ruby193-* packages in the nightly
> tags, so they should only contain tfm-* and core packages in the main
> nightly tag and rubygem-* packages in the nonscl nightly tag.
>
> I'll drop another e-mail to the list before starting. Thanks for your
> patience.
Foreman nightly el* repos are now updated with the new tfm packages (172
SRPMs), everything should be back to normal.
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
···
On 24/08/15 07:56, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> On 17/08/15 14:50, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>> In a week or two, I'll merge the "fixes #4841 - add tfm SCL source
>> package" PR and begin a mass-rebuild of our RPMs in nightly tags. This
>> will cause all "ruby193" prefixes to be changed to "tfm", in names and
>> inter-package dependencies.
>>
>> https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/pull/249
>>
>> Lots more info in the description there and in the linked YouTube
>> recording from a while back.
>>
>> This'll be very disruptive to packagers while it's happening, so I'll
>> wait for the current set of active foreman-packaging PRs to be closed
>> first. New plugin releases will probably have to wait it out, or go to
>> rpm/1.9 in some cases.
>>
>> I'll also be clearing out any old ruby193-* packages in the nightly
>> tags, so they should only contain tfm-* and core packages in the main
>> nightly tag and rubygem-* packages in the nonscl nightly tag.
>>
>> I'll drop another e-mail to the list before starting. Thanks for your
>> patience.
>
> I'll be starting this tomorrow, Tuesday 25th Aug. RPM nightlies will be
> paused until it's all complete and PRs to foreman-packaging rpm/develop
> will be disrupted.
> >> In a week or two, I'll merge the "fixes #4841 - add tfm SCL source
> >> package" PR and begin a mass-rebuild of our RPMs in nightly tags. This
> >> will cause all "ruby193" prefixes to be changed to "tfm", in names and
> >> inter-package dependencies.
> >>
> >> https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/pull/249
> >>
> >> Lots more info in the description there and in the linked YouTube
> >> recording from a while back.
> >>
> >> This'll be very disruptive to packagers while it's happening, so I'll
> >> wait for the current set of active foreman-packaging PRs to be closed
> >> first. New plugin releases will probably have to wait it out, or go to
> >> rpm/1.9 in some cases.
> >>
> >> I'll also be clearing out any old ruby193-* packages in the nightly
> >> tags, so they should only contain tfm-* and core packages in the main
> >> nightly tag and rubygem-* packages in the nonscl nightly tag.
> >>
> >> I'll drop another e-mail to the list before starting. Thanks for your
> >> patience.
> >
> > I'll be starting this tomorrow, Tuesday 25th Aug. RPM nightlies will be
> > paused until it's all complete and PRs to foreman-packaging rpm/develop
> > will be disrupted.
>
> Foreman nightly el* repos are now updated with the new tfm packages (172
> SRPMs), everything should be back to normal.
>
Great!
>
> If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will probably
> be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
> replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
>
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in the
release notes?
Ohad
···
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> On 24/08/15 07:56, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> > On 17/08/15 14:50, Dominic Cleal wrote:
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I haven't
tested it yet.
···
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal > wrote:
> If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will probably
> be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
> replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
>
>
> is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in the
> release notes?
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm SCL with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a "supported"
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as part of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
···
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal <dcleal+g@redhat.com > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I haven’t
tested it yet.
···
----- Original Message -----
> For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm SCL with
> a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should now be
> populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is greatly
> appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a "supported"
> nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we will
> need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as part of
> the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
>
> ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
> ruby193-rubygem-haml
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>
> > On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal > > > wrote:
> > > If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will
> > probably
> > > be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
> > > replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
> > >
> > >
> > > is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in the
> > > release notes?
> >
> > Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please start
> > building a list.
> >
> > package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I haven't
> > tested it yet.
> >
> > --
> > Dominic Cleal
> > dominic@cleal.org
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "foreman-dev" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Eric D. Helms
> Red Hat Engineering
> Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal dominic@cleal.org wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal <dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I haven’t
tested it yet.
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal dominic@cleal.org wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal <dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I haven’t
tested it yet.
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm
SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should
now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is
greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we
will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as
part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal dominic@cleal.org > wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal < > dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue
will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that
have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users
in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please
start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I
haven’t
tested it yet.
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to tfm
SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should
now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is
greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely packages we
will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements as
part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal dominic@cleal.org > > wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal < > > dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue
will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that
have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our users
in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them, please
start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I
haven’t
tested it yet.
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to
tfm
SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should
now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is
greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely
packages we
will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements
as
part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal <dominic@cleal.org > > > > > wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal < > > > dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue
will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that
have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our
users
in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them,
please
start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I
haven’t
tested it yet.
For Katello users, we have also now completed the migration to
tfm
SCL
with
a green nightly release pipeline. The nightly repositories should
now be
populated with all the proper tfm-ized packages. Any testing is
greatly
appreciated, especially upgrade testing (even though its not a
“supported”
nightly feature). As Dominic mentioned, there are likely
packages we
will
need to identify and handle that were removed from requirements
as
part
of
the move and will cause issues. Two known packages are:
ruby193-rubygem-hpricot
ruby193-rubygem-haml
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Dominic Cleal <dominic@cleal.org > > > > > > > wrote:
On 01/09/15 13:22, Ohad Levy wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dominic Cleal < > > > > dcleal+g@redhat.com > > > > > > > > > mailto:dcleal+g@redhat.com> wrote:
If you see bugs, please file them. The most common issue
will
probably
be on upgrade with unused ruby193 packages installed that
have no
replacement or use - these should simply be erased.
is there a list or some command sample we can provide our
users
in
the
release notes?
Not until we know what they are. If you come across them,
please
start
building a list.
package-cleanup with leaves/leaf-regex may also solve it, but I
haven’t
tested it yet.
