From Fedora Project Wiki

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting of {2007-08-28}

Present

  • DavidLutterkort (lutter)
  • JasonTibbitts (tibbs)
  • JesseKeating (f13)
  • RexDieter (rdieter)
  • TomCallaway (spot)
  • ToshioKuratomi (abadger1999)
  • VilleSkyttä (scop)

Writeups

The following drafts have been accepted by FESCO and are to be written into the guidelines:

Votes

The following proposals were considered:

  • The first three sections of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PHP (Requires and Provides for PEAR and PECL packages and Macros and Scriptlets for PECL packages).
  • Accepted (7 - 0)
  • Voting for: tibbs spot abadger1999 scop rdieter lutter f13

Other Discussions

The following additional items were discussed; see the logs for full details.

IRC Logs

[12:04]  * rdieter comes back in
[12:05]  * spot is here
[12:05]  <rdieter> abadger1999: how's that? :)
[12:05]  <abadger1999> heh heh
[12:05]  <spot> f13 will be here shortly
[12:06]  <spot> he was fondling his balls.
[12:06]  * lutter is here
[12:06]  <lutter> spot: tmi
[12:06]  <rdieter> eew
[12:06]  <f13> *sigh*
[12:06]  <spot> scop: here?
[12:08]  <spot> tibbs?
[12:08]  <tibbs|h> Yep.
[12:09]  <spot> ok, well, we've only got one item for today: PHP!
[12:09]  <f13> fwiw, I was using http://www.chinese-holistic-health-exercises.com/wrist-strengthening-exercises.html to help my wrists.
[12:09]  <spot> specifically, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PHP
[12:09]  * RemiFedora here if you need comment about this draft ;)
[12:10]  <spot> RemiFedora: the "Packages with channels" section has a lot of TODO in it
[12:10]  <spot> RemiFedora: is that ready for us to vote on yet?
[12:10]  <RemiFedora> yes, mainly PEAR/PECL updates ready for now
[12:10]  * scop is here now
[12:11]  <tibbs> Trying to do a visual diff of the old and new versions.
[12:12]  <RemiFedora> i think diff are in "FPC  notes"
[12:12]  <tibbs> Well, sort of.
[12:13]  <tibbs> PEAR adds mandatory Requires(post) and (postun) and uses the %{__pear} macro now.
[12:13]  <tibbs> Which is all good.
[12:14]  * spot is not a PHP expert, but all the changes that don't say "TODO" look ok to me
[12:14]  <tibbs> +1 from me to the PEAR Packages and PECL Packages sections.
[12:14]  <tibbs> We're to vote on the "Marcos and scriptlets" section as well?
[12:14]  <spot> tibbs: yeah, i think so.
[12:15]  <tibbs> It would be nice to not need to ask that question.
[12:15]  <RemiFedora> yes, register PECL extensions is new (already done for PEAR extensions)
[12:16]  <tibbs> Does EPEL lose anything by not having %{pecl_install} and %{pecl_uninstall} ?
[12:16]  <RemiFedora> EPEL lose extensions registration (as in Fedora <= 7)
[12:17]  <tibbs> But is it problematic not to have it?
[12:17]  <tibbs> Or is it not meaningful for old PHP versions?
[12:17]  <RemiFedora> it's only information (answer to "pecl list")
[12:18]  <tibbs> OK.
[12:18]  <spot> +1 on PEAR Packages, PECL Packages, and Macros and Scriplets
[12:18]  <RemiFedora> and registration is broken (for RPM) until pear 1.5.0
[12:18]  <tibbs> So +1 from me to the first three sections.
[12:18]  <abadger1999> That sounds reasonable to me
[12:19]  <abadger1999> +1 for those three changes
[12:19]  <scop> +1 too
[12:19]  <rdieter> +1 too
[12:19]  <scop> has there been any effort in having rpmbuild autogenerate some of this stuff?
[12:19]  <lutter> +1
[12:20]  <tibbs> what could be autogenerated?
[12:20]  <scop> eg. some of the requires/provides
[12:20]  <spot> ok, the first three sections pass vote.
[12:20]  <RemiFedora> scop, we have "pear make-rpm-spec"
[12:20]  <scop> RemiFedora, that's not quite what I mean - I'm thinking about stuff like python abi version
[12:20]  <tibbs> rpmbuild doesn't even do automatic dependency generation for Python.
[12:21]  <scop> it does the abi part, and Panu is working on more
[12:21]  <tibbs> Well, except for python(abi).
[12:21]  <jeremy> tibbs: although panu is working on auto dep generation for python
[12:21]  <jeremy> (after it being on my todo list for way too many years)
[12:21]  <RemiFedora> i'm thinking of something to check PEAR dependencies (as for perl)...
[12:21]  <scop> anyway, that's not at all a blocker here, just thought it would be good to think about it for php too
[12:21]  <scop> RemiFedora, good
[12:22]  <f13> +1 for me.
[12:22]  <spot> ok, does anyone have anything they'd like to bring up today?
[12:24]  <f13> I have not.
[12:24]  <abadger1999> Yes
[12:24]  <abadger1999> One item + one FYI
[12:24]  <abadger1999> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-August/msg00084.html
[12:25]  <abadger1999> This is clarification of existing guidelines, does anyone think I made it more confusing?
[12:25]  <tibbs> The whole review guideline/packaging guideline separation needs cleanup, I think.
[12:26]  <abadger1999> tibbs: True.  It would be best if we could generate the review guidelines from the packaging guidelines automatically.
[12:26]  <bpepple|lt> spot: I contacted harold hoyer about the Initscripts lsb question we had during FESCo last week, and he's going to work on a guideline proposal.  Once he's done, he send it to the mailing list.
[12:26]  <spot> So, on the clarification, it looks good to me.
[12:26]  <tibbs> abadger1999:  That would require more wiki magic than I would care to know about.
[12:27]  <rdieter> clarification: +1
[12:27]  <tibbs> +1
[12:27]  <spot> +1
[12:28]  <abadger1999> +1 from me of course
[12:28]  <f13> +1
[12:29]  <spot> ok, thats +5.
[12:29]  <spot> abadger1999: what was your FYI?
[12:29]  <abadger1999> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PythonEggs
[12:29]  <abadger1999> Most of the meat is there now.  I'll post a finished draft to the mailing list today
[12:30]  <abadger1999> We have two packages that are going to be implementing the "multiple versions" portion of that in the very near future.
[12:30]  <spot> ok
[12:30]  <scop> +1 for the previous clarification
[12:30]  <abadger1999> One is already submitted: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=257381
[12:30]  <abadger1999> So you can look at the spec file now.
[12:31]  <abadger1999> The question of when to provide eggs is somewhat open.
[12:31]  <abadger1999> I lean towards upstream being the decider of what they provide but there are arguments the other way as well.
[12:32]  <spot> abadger1999: looks good, looking forward to the final draft
[12:33]  <spot> any other business for today?
[12:34]  <abadger1999> Nothing else here
[12:34]  <spot> ok, i guess we're done for today then. thanks everyone. :)
[12:37]  <-- scop has left this channel ("Leaving").
[12:39]  <tibbs> BTW, the Emacs guidelines should move to writeup as they were approved by FESCo last week.
[12:42]  <spot> ok