This all looks good to me :thumbsup:

This request should be updated with the following parameters:

Tag info:

$sig = proposed-updates

DistTags:

• c9s: %dist ~proposed.el9
• c10s: %dist ~proposed.el10

The vendor string should be set to CentOS to match the main distribution so that sticky vendor systems consider these updates equivalent and final updates seamlessly replace these..

@ngompa pointed out that we probably want to set the vendor string to be the same as stock CentOS Steam, as otherwise installs using vendor pinning won't be able to seamlessly switch between packages when MRs are merged in Stream proper. Down the road it'd be better to handle this in DNF via vendor equivalencies, but those don't exist yet, so using the same string seems reasonable for the time being.

@salimma , @dcavalca , @ngompa : I guess it's a new SIG that hasn't been publicly announced (yet) :) (I know there was a proposal about fasttrack SIG last month so I guess it's related)

I can easily create the new tags/targets (and corresponding new SIG gpg key for it) but my only concern is about the name proposed-updates as using dash - isn't following our tags convention and so automation : https://docs.centos.org/centos-sig-guide/cbs/#cbs-sigs-tags-structure

So either use something like proposed_updates or proposedupdates ?
Really waiting on your feedback because I need also to create new group in FAS/ACO that would match (for koji/cbs permissions) and so we need to chose now and not later :)

As a summary :

• creating new SIG group (with name to be defined here) with two sponsors
• new SIG key to be added in signing and also pub key exported to website
• creating new cbs/koji tags/targets inheriting that new group/new key (and modifying dist macro to be CentOS and not CentOS <name> SIG (which was requested by default for SIGs in cbs)

Happy to work on in as soon as I'll have the needed info (seems to be just the SIG name

@salimma , @dcavalca , @ngompa : I guess it's a new SIG that hasn't been publicly announced (yet) :) (I know there was a proposal about fasttrack SIG last month so I guess it's related)

I forgot to mention that - but yes, this is the (proposed) SIG formerly known as Fast Track, which got approved yesterday but the bikeshedding process (because people have qualms about what Fast Track connotes) resulted in proposed updates being the consensus instead. Bonus point: it is used by Debian and Ubuntu for similar use cases so that helps align expectations

I can easily create the new tags/targets (and corresponding new SIG gpg key for it) but my only concern is about the name proposed-updates as using dash - isn't following our tags convention and so automation : https://docs.centos.org/centos-sig-guide/cbs/#cbs-sigs-tags-structure
Good catch, thanks

So either use something like proposed_updates or proposedupdates ?
proposed_updates seems more readable, otherwise it starts reading like German

Really waiting on your feedback because I need also to create new group in FAS/ACO that would match (for koji/cbs permissions) and so we need to chose now and not later :)

To verify - for FAS/ACO this will then be sig-proposed_updates right? Since for Hyperscale it's hyperscale tag / sig-hyperscale group

As a summary :

• creating new SIG group (with name to be defined here) with two sponsors
• new SIG key to be added in signing and also pub key exported to website
• creating new cbs/koji tags/targets inheriting that new group/new key (and modifying dist macro to be CentOS and not CentOS <name> SIG (which was requested by default for SIGs in cbs)

Happy to work on in as soon as I'll have the needed info (seems to be just the SIG name

Plus the tag for packages should not have the leading dot, as @ngompa noted. Just ~proposed.el9 / ~proposed.el10

Thanks Fabian!

Yes, dist tags can be set to whatever we want, as it's a koji parameter, but for the rest it's all inherited everywhere (including for which key to use, where to push etc)
So if you all agree on proposed_updates , I'll go with that (still waiting for more +1 from new SIG, hopefully getting announce about it soon) :)

I'm ok with proposed_updates here

I'm ok with proposed_updates here

+1

Also please give @jonathanspw permissions to build inside the extras tag for the release package

For reference, https://git.centos.org/centos/board/issue/130 was the board approval ticket for the SIG.

Thanks for the confirmation and link :)
I'd like to take this opportunity to work on this with @gwmngilfen but due to to conflicting meetings for the two of us, we'll just do work in pairing mode next Monday , on all needed aspects (IPA groups/aliases/gpg key/new koji tags/etc)

Created :

* Checking distribution el9s configuration...
 -> Checking proposed_updates config...
Creating user : proposed_updates
Using default options for proposed_updates/packages
Creating tag  : proposed_updates9s-packages-main-candidate
Creating tag  : proposed_updates9s-packages-main-testing
Creating tag  : proposed_updates9s-packages-main-release
 -> creating proposed_updates9s-packages-main-el9s
Added external repo centos9s-baseos to tag proposed_updates9s-packages-main-el9s-build (priority 5)
Added external repo centos9s-appstream to tag proposed_updates9s-packages-main-el9s-build (priority 10)
Added external repo centos9s-crb to tag proposed_updates9s-packages-main-el9s-build (priority 15)
Added external repo centos9s-buildroot to tag proposed_updates9s-packages-main-el9s-build (priority 20)

* Checking distribution el10s configuration...
 -> Checking proposed_updates config...
Using default options for proposed_updates/packages
Creating tag  : proposed_updates10s-packages-main-candidate
Creating tag  : proposed_updates10s-packages-main-testing
Creating tag  : proposed_updates10s-packages-main-release
 -> creating proposed_updates10s-packages-main-el10s
Added external repo centos10s-baseos to tag proposed_updates10s-packages-main-el10s-build (priority 5)
Added external repo centos10s-appstream to tag proposed_updates10s-packages-main-el10s-build (priority 10)
Added external repo centos10s-crb to tag proposed_updates10s-packages-main-el10s-build (priority 15)
Added external repo centos10s-buildroot to tag proposed_updates10s-packages-main-el10s-build (priority 20)

https://gitlab.com/CentOS/proposed_updates is also created, and mapped to new https://accounts.centos.org/group/sig-proposed_updates/ group that was also created.

Can you verify that you have all the needed info, and verify that it's working fine for you in cbs/koji and then close the ticket please ?
FWIW, new gpg key was created and pushed to https://www.centos.org/keys/#proposed-updates-sig

Forgot to mention also that @jonathanspw is part of the extras group to let him tag -release packages to extras-common

Thank you! I was off yesterday, will try today

Looks like
- @jonathanspw is marked as a sponsor in ACO but somehow doesn't show as a member in gitlab.com/CentOS/proposed_updates. I added him manually
- I'm not marked as a sponsor in ACO, @arrfab can you make me one? Thanks

• @jonathanspw is marked as a sponsor in ACO but somehow doesn't show as a member in gitlab.com/CentOS/proposed_updates. I added him manually

This shouldn't be necessary, membership is updated whenever one reauths on gitlab.

yes please : don't manually add gitlab individual accounts rights here and there .. otherwise, why are we just even trying to use FAS/ACO groups ? ;-)
@salimma : also your request was about @jonathanspw being the chair but I don't see anywhere that you also wanted to be one ;-)

yes please : don't manually add gitlab individual accounts rights here and there .. otherwise, why are we just even trying to use FAS/ACO groups ? ;-)
@salimma : also your request was about @jonathanspw being the chair but I don't see anywhere that you also wanted to be one ;-)

apologies, I forgot to mention that - Jonathan is the chair for the new SIG, I'm co-chair so in practice we both should probably have sponsor permissions. Thanks!

yeah, you're now added too as sponsor

Closing as all work was done

Haven't got round to publishing cento sure leased proposed_updates yet, I will reopen if it turns out I don't have the permission to publish. Can confirm everything else seems to work

Typing on mobile... I meant cento sure leased proposed_updates

centos-release-proposed_updates