#12271 bugzilla epel10 version
Closed: Fixed 24 days ago by carlwgeorge. Opened a month ago by carlwgeorge.

  • Describe the issue

I originally sent the below message to bugzilla-owner@redhat.com.

EPEL 10 is getting started, so I would like to have an epel10 version in bugzilla. This would be under the Fedora classification and the Fedora EPEL product. EPEL 10 is going to work a bit differently by integrating minor versions, I think we are going to try to get by with just the major version in bugzilla. We may reevaluate this in the future, but for now just the major version is sufficient.

I received this response.

Hi, in Bugzilla teams manage their own products. You need to reach out to the Fedora Infrastructure team for changes to products in the fedora category.

Can someone from infra/releng create the epel10 version?

  • When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD)

We're hoping to officially launch EPEL 10 in November or December this year, so lets set a deadline of 2024-11-01. That said, EPEL packagers are already staring their builds and working in bugzilla, so the sooner this is available the better.

  • When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD)

When RHEL 10 is EOL (approximate 2035-05-31).

  • If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact?

EPEL maintainers and users will not be able to select epel10 as a version for EPEL 10 bugs, leading to confusion and frustration.


Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue assigned to kevin

a month ago

I can create the component, but we may need to adjust the bugzilla sync toddler to setup packages and maintainers.

Ok, epel10 should be there now. I don't know if we want to keep this to track / check any toddler changes or file that elsewhere.

CC: zlopez

Metadata Update from @jnsamyak:
- Issue tagged with: low-trouble, medium-gain, ops

a month ago

The sync toddler like now is working with Fedora and Fedora EPEL products in Bugzilla. There are few differences between them:

  • The branches that are being checked to validate if the project is retired
  • And the POC is set to EPEL POC for EPEL components

What else needs to be done for EPEL 10?

For the branches, EPEL 10 does look different than EPEL 9 because there will be minor version branches.

  • EPEL 9:
    • bugilla version: epel9
    • distgit branch: epel9
  • EPEL 10:
    • bugzilla version: epel10
    • distgit branches:
      • epel10
      • epel10.0 (forked from epel10 right before RHEL 10.0 release)
      • epel10.1 (forked from epel10 right before RHEL 10.1 release)
      • and so on...

If we need to have a one-to-one mapping of distgit branches to bugzilla versions, we may need to do minor versions in bugzilla after all.

For the POC I don't imagine we'll need to do anything different.

This should work with the current implementation of distgit_bugzilla_sync. We will just need to adjust the Fedora EPEL regex for branches.

The versions itself are not created by this script, they need to be probably created on the product in Bugzilla.

If I understand you correctly, you're referring to the consumer_config.distgit_bugzilla_sync.products."Fedora EPEL" section of toddlers/templates/fedora-messaging.toml, correct?

Assuming that's the case, here's a PR implementing it.

https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/2219

Let me know if I missed anything.

@carlwgeorge That is exactly what we need.

I already merged the PR, but still working on getting distgit_bugzilla_sync working after PDC decommissioning. Should finish that today.

The changes are now deployed and the distgit_bugzilla_sync is already running in production for 2 hours. Not sure how long it will take for it to finish.

So I needed to disable the distgit_bugzilla_sync again. See https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/12127#comment-926510 for more info.

I deployed the fix for distgit_bugzilla_sync, so it should start working for EPEL 10 now.

I'm able to select an epel10 version in bugzilla now. I'm not sure how to verify that everything with distgit_bugzilla_sync is working perfectly, but for now I'll assume it's fine and I can always open another issue later if anything is amiss. Thanks for the help y'all!

Metadata Update from @carlwgeorge:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

24 days ago

Log in to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Boards 1
Ops Status: Backlog