#10891 Haskell package group
Opened 2 years ago by petersen. Modified 19 days ago

I would like to revisit having a Haskell SIG package Group,
which we now want to add to all Haskell libraries in Fedora and most Haskell packages.

Currently in Fedora Accounts there are:

https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/user/haskell-sig/

  • an old pseudo user, originally setup for bugzilla (haskell-devel list).

https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/githaskell-sig/

  • (I think this was for fedorahosted?)

https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/haskell/

  • I believe this is currently not in active use?

https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/haskell-lang-sig/

  • Some years ago in #6563 it was decided to use this as the Haskell package Group, but the SIG did not get round to actually using it yet across our packages (currently there are around 640 Haskell packages in F37).

(Ideally I would prefer a shorter name, but I think we can live with haskell-lang-sig, unless something "better" is available now.:)

(Previously it was considered impossible to change the haskell-sig fas user to be the new group: hence the new group was made. Perhaps just "haskell" was thought too short/ambiguous.)

I want the Haskell SIG to join the current move to adopting a common package group enforced across all Haskell libraries and dependencies (probably excluding ghc and ghc-rpm-macros).

So if we want to continue with the previously agreed haskell-lang-sig group, can you please add it now to dist-git Pagure so that we can start to have it added to our Haskell packages, thanks!

cc @haskell-sig @qulogic


Would it be possible to add a list of all the Haskell libraries and packages you wish the sig to be added to?

Metadata Update from @phsmoura:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on Assignee (was: Needs Review)
- Issue tagged with: low-gain, low-trouble, ops

2 years ago

Metadata Update from @zlopez:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on Reporter (was: Waiting on Assignee)

2 years ago

So, we can add that group... but it needs a mailing list. Shall we just call that haskell-lang-sig also?

Also @decathorpe can probibly add this to the script we are using for rust and golang packages.

We should first approve that as FESCo and add it to the SIG Policy docs.

Sorry for the slow reply...

Would it be possible to add a list of all the Haskell libraries and packages you wish the sig to be added to?

@mobrien: Would you like me to list them all (600+) here?
Let me get back soon to you after posting the list first to the haskell list.
But at the very least I would like all ghc-* libraries included I think.
(So an exclusion list would probably be a lot shorter. :-)

So, we can add that group... but it needs a mailing list. Shall we just call that haskell-lang-sig also?

That sounds okay yes, thanks. Would that list be closed to haskell-lang-sig members or open?
(Currently we have haskell list and haskell-devel list (for bz traffic).)

Also @decathorpe can probibly add this to the script we are using for rust and golang packages.

That would be good

We should first approve that as FESCo and add it to the SIG Policy docs.

So should I open a Fesco ticket for that?

@mobrien: Would you like me to list them all (600+) here?

Nope. please hold on that. :)

Let me get back soon to you after posting the list first to the haskell list.
But at the very least I would like all ghc-* libraries included I think.
(So an exclusion list would probably be a lot shorter. :-)

So, we can add that group... but it needs a mailing list. Shall we just call that haskell-lang-sig also?

That sounds okay yes, thanks. Would that list be closed to haskell-lang-sig members or open?
(Currently we have haskell list and haskell-devel list (for bz traffic).)

It has to be a private list, because it will get cc'ed on security bugs.
You can have anyone you like subscribed tho. You can manage the list, just make sure it's not open due to the security issues.

Also @decathorpe can probibly add this to the script we are using for rust and golang packages.

That would be good

needs FESCo approval. ;)

We should first approve that as FESCo and add it to the SIG Policy docs.

So should I open a Fesco ticket for that?

Yep. Please do.

[backlog refinement]
@petersen We can create the list/group anytime, but without FESCo approval we can't auto-assign packages.
Did you have time to create the FESCo ticket?

@petersen Can you request that and reopen this when you do?

Thanks!

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue close_status updated to: Insufficient data
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

a year ago

Metadata Update from @petersen:
- Issue status updated to: Open (was: Closed)

3 months ago

I finally opened the Fesco ticket now: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3143

Sorry for dropping the ball again - I admit I struggle with tracking pagure tickets...

Sorry this got sidetracked. ;(

I added a comment on the fesco ticket, we need to update fesco docs, then we can update the script in releng repo.

As soon as I know the exact rule (package set "ghc-*", ACL "commit" or "admin"?, I can add a rule to the relent script with a PR.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Boards 1
ops Status: Backlog