I don't see how to vote for that, but you have mine.

Let's hold off on sending these to Cisco temporarily. It's not clear whether it's safe to release this update with ABI version 7 after all. We need to discuss more in https://github.com/cisco/openh264/issues/3863.

It's definitely not safe. Let's just drop these builds; we'll need to try again.

Bummer. So, for rawhide, perhaps we should just resign the existing build... or do you think it will be solved soon?

We need to rebuild with ABI version 8.

It's definitely not safe. Let's just drop these builds; we'll need to try again.

Alright. I have the rawhide tarball with RPMs ready to go, I was waiting for a double check from my teammates and was about to send it today.

The new process is now documented so when you let us know that we're good to go with the new builds we should be able to do it in a timely manner.

I appreciate everyone's patience.

There is a newer rawhide build now, openh264-2.6.0-2.fc43. Please go ahead and send that.

For all other branches, we still need to do new builds.

As a side note, I made a empty repo for rawhide/f43. Hopefully that will help out places like CI that error on that repo missing. We can update it with the builds once cisco has them.

The F43 tarball was sent to the openh264-publishing@cisco.com mailing list with the title F43 RPMs for OpenH264 2.6.0 [1-5/5]. :thumbsup:

Please note that due to e-mail server file size limitations the tarball had to be split into 5 different parts, thus 5 e-mails in total.

I got confirmation from Cisco earlier today that they updated their CDN.

I verified it:
$ curl -I http://ciscobinary.openh264.org/openh264-2.6.0-2.fc43.x86_64.rpm
HTTP/1.1 200 OK

And went ahead and synced the repodata to sundries01.

I believe that should be it, let's see if something went wrong...

The rawhide packages seem to be signed with wrong key https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/PZNFCPDE5RMTQTWWNJLH7BPMZ6LYDFXP/

The rawhide packages seem to be signed with wrong key https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/PZNFCPDE5RMTQTWWNJLH7BPMZ6LYDFXP/

OpenPGP check for package "openh264-2.4.1-2.fc42.x86_64"
Those aren't the rawhide packages this ticket is about.

The RPMs that were just updated come from this build, openh264-2.6.0-2.fc43:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2670904

for f40, f41, f42 and epel10 there are now builds for the newly release 2.5.1 version.

for f40, f41, f42 and epel10 there are now builds for the newly release 2.5.1 version.

Any particular reason for 2.5.1 instead of 2.6.0?

I have one more thing to ask of you.
Please never tag the builds into anything other than the dedicated *-openh264 tags (e.g. f43-openh264). If it's tagged into e.g. f43-testing-candidate it can eventually make its way to the main tag (e.g. f43) and the main buildroot, if not caught. This can cause very bad things to happen in terms of legal consequences.

Fortunately we managed to catch it in time and retagged the builds manually.

I am currently looking into how to make it so that this cannot happen in the first place, through tag policy right in Koji and then through a filter in Pungi. But this isn't done yet so we need to be very careful for now.

Thank you.

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12635

Any particular reason for 2.5.1 instead of 2.6.0?

ABI bump... I think you do not want to attempt to coordinate this change between both Cisco and stable Fedoras! It's much less of an issue if rawhide is broken for a little while.

I have one more thing to ask of you.
Please never tag the builds into anything other than the dedicated *-openh264 tags (e.g. f43-openh264). If it's tagged into e.g. f43-testing-candidate it can eventually make its way to the main tag (e.g. f43) and the main buildroot, if not caught. This can cause very bad things to happen in terms of legal consequences.

@wtaymans please add a warning comment to the spec file immediately above the Name and Version, where the packager is unlikely to miss it, to demonstrate how to perform the builds with fedpkg build --target=f*-openh264. Otherwise, we'll forget this every time.