12:04:38 #startmeeting rpm_packaging 12:04:39 Meeting started Thu May 18 12:04:38 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is IgorYozhikov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 12:04:40 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 12:04:42 The meeting name has been set to 'rpm_packaging' 12:04:59 #chair IgorYozhikov toabctl jpena 12:05:00 Current chairs: IgorYozhikov jpena toabctl 12:05:16 ping toabctl, dirk, apevec, aplanas, IgorYozhikov, jpena, jruzicka, number80, kaslcrof 12:05:17 let's spend some time on agenda 12:05:37 hey 12:05:42 hey 12:09:05 o/ 12:09:14 so let's start 12:09:25 # topic - pbr as discussed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465918/ 12:09:30 #topic - pbr as discussed https://review.openstack.org/#/c/465918/ 12:09:57 I uploaded commit and saw that some of dependencies are not found 12:10:23 so I can disable %check because most of them are required by tests 12:10:30 according to test-requirements 12:10:41 your thoughts colleagues? ^^^ 12:11:40 IgorYozhikov: I just fixed the suse ci bits 12:11:51 I saw, you are swift :) 12:13:00 I'll need to add some stuff to the RDO CI, we always assumed a git repo in the openstack namespace, and pbr is openstack-dev 12:13:28 yes, I saw issues in dlrn job 12:13:28 if test requirements aren't available, disabling %check until they are sounds OK to me 12:14:13 so, I'll cover test stuff with %if_with tests, ok? 12:15:03 jpena: IgorYozhikov : ah, I misse dthat, maybe we want to move it to openstack-dev subdir on rpm-packaging? 12:15:24 dirk, not a problem 12:15:37 no, I can fix it without too much trouble 12:15:38 I'll move it into openstack-dev 12:15:53 if necessary 12:18:53 I think it would be more consistent but I'm not sure it would actually work out of the box without some hammering on the CI 12:18:56 I can take a look at that 12:19:12 2 questions: 1) should I disable tests? 2) move to openstack-dev folder? 12:19:21 I'll patch the simple case (keeping it under openstack/), then we can look at the more complex 12:27:20 colleagues ? 12:27:46 I asked 2 questions and want to understand my next steps 12:28:04 IgorYozhikov: I'd say yes to 1, but wait for 2 12:28:11 +1 12:28:15 +1 12:28:18 ok 12:28:21 yey! 12:28:26 :) 12:28:51 let's move forward 12:29:02 #topic - singlespec 12:30:19 toabctl, is this your topic ^^^ ? 12:30:36 hm. I did not add it. is it from last week? 12:30:41 or maybe from dirk? 12:30:46 during previous meeting we discussed it 12:30:53 sorry I added it 12:31:00 I just felt reminded again because of the pbr review 12:31:18 because in the SUSE distro we already converted pbr to singlespec, so it would not be upstreamable unless we decide to switch to it 12:31:35 I think the action item was jpena to talk to number80 , did that happen? 12:31:35 and there are requests from the opensuse community to provide packages which are singlespec'ed 12:31:38 ok we decided to use it but with if cases 12:31:59 let's listen our RH colleagues 12:32:06 jpena, jruzicka ^^^' 12:32:32 * jpena still waiting for input from the elders 12:34:36 jpena: could you ask for input a bit more? 12:34:44 dirk: yep, I will 12:34:56 thanks a lot ! :) 12:39:24 btw, https://softwarefactory-project.io/r/7978 should fix the RDO CI for the pbr review 12:42:08 +1 12:43:36 next ? 12:43:42 yes 12:43:45 yes 12:43:59 #topic - packages reviews (https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/rpm-packaging+status:open ) 12:50:15 I don't think there is anything special in the queue... 12:50:18 Greetings. I hope this is not invitation-only. 12:50:29 cousin_luigi, it is not. hey :) 12:50:47 :) 12:51:02 #topic - OpenFloor 12:51:09 toabctl: I wanted to talk about that suggestion I had made some time ago about dealing with singlespec. 12:51:23 I wrote something on the launchpad page too, but it must have been the wrong place. 12:51:50 cousin_luigi, where is the suggestion? 12:52:03 In short: for the python modules that cannot be unified, I recommend adding a Provides: python2-%pypi_name, at least for opensuse. 12:52:58 toabctl: https://bugs.launchpad.net/rpm-packaging/+bug/1690199 <- was this the wrong place? 12:52:59 Launchpad bug 1690199 in rpm-packaging "Add python2- provides to spec files" [Undecided,New] 12:53:47 I tried doing it myself but I failed. I couldn't understand much about the internal workflow. 12:54:18 dirk, does singlespec provides something similar? 12:56:25 cousin_luigi, we just discussed singlespec and need to wait for feedback from RH side 12:56:52 to ensure that we can use it 12:57:12 IgorYozhikov: Glad to hear that! 12:57:13 IgorYozhikov: yes, singlespec automatically generates the python2- provides 12:57:30 cousin_luigi: I remember the discussion we had a few days ago, thanks for bringing that up again. I forgot about it 12:57:48 any objections to us adding a macro or some other way of providing python2-* for all thepackages? 12:57:55 that would unblock the SUSE singlespec efforts somewhat 12:58:20 while we haven't decided whether or not to adopt that 12:58:21 dirk: do you have the python_provide macro? We're using it in Fedora 12:58:41 no, whats that? 12:58:44 I'm fine and Fedora already uses provides py2 12:58:47 * jpena searches 12:59:16 dirk: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro 12:59:17 jpena: if that does the job, then lets add it to the suse amcros. I'll make sure that we'll transpire it into opensuse then 12:59:45 you can use it like: 12:59:45 %{?python_provide:%python_provide python2-%{srcname}} 13:00:02 time over... 13:00:07 and it provides python-xyz and python2-xyz for the pkg 13:00:08 yep 13:00:15 jpena: I'll take a look at that, thanks for pointing it out 13:00:21 jpena: can you post a review? 13:00:31 dirk: for the macro? Sure, I will 13:00:40 good! 13:00:55 let's proceed at our channel 13:00:58 #endmeeting