Hello. :wave:
Could you please share some more context? Is el10-openjdk supposed to be a tag, a build target, or something else? I'm not sure what to look for. If you could share a koji.fedoraproject.org URL that would be very helpful and I'll sort it out for you.

It is buildroot and tag.

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12741 <- https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12410 <- https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11848 <- https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12364 ....

The fedora and epel8 and epel9 BR/tags are ok. I always ask for new fXY-openjdk when rawhide forks, and it keeps living. Similarly with el9-openjdk and el8 openjdk where is just one BR for each epel. With el10 I was conufused since origin. But with epel10, I had - https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12410 - understood, that there is no rolling buildroot, which I could track via el10-openjdk. If you now say - here is el10.2-openjdk and use it, and later ask for el10.3-openjdk, that is perfectly ok.

Question here is, if there is really no rolling el10, usable by el10-openjdk whcih can be used [1]for epel10 branch aout of the box.

[1] I had lost the ability to build simly by fedpkg build, but am always using --target *-openjdk. That is not optional but necessary and exceptionally well working . Of course I'm trying to have aligned branches and buildroots.

I guess for similar reasons there is no rawhide-openjdk.... So el10.2-opendjk would be jsut good...

So if I understand it correctly you need us to create a new tag named el10-openjdk that is based on the epel10.2 tag [1]? As it doesn't seem that el10-openjdk exists yet.

$ koji taginfo el10-openjdk
[ERROR] koji: GenericError: No such tagInfo: 'el10-openjdk'

[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=117556

EDIT:
Or I suppose the tag should be named el10.2-openjdk as per your comment above?

Ifthere is no rolling epel10 target, then yes, then el10.2-openjdk would be needed, and would be enough. I would like to stay as explicit as possible with ?-openjdk tags.

But I need to clarify. There is really no way to create el10-openjdk following rolling el10, similarly as there is no possibility to create rawhde-openjdk following rolling rawhide? If such would be created, they would need manual work each time rawhide forks, or epel10 forks to new 10.z ? Thanx, and sorry for confusing question, I had probably successfully confused myself.

I think moving this / setting this up should be part of the epel branching process?

CC: @carlwgeorge @dherrera

Jiri, I found this comment in one of the tickets you posted. [1]
EPEL has never been rolling (and by policy doesn't allow rolling packages), but it has been major version only until now.

Please keep in mind that I am just as confused by the EPEL versioning as you are (probably even more) so hopefully someone more knowledgeable can chime in here. Kevin already tagged them, I would ask for a bit of patience. Thank you.

[1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12410#comment-940679

Please keep in mind that I am just as confused by the EPEL versioning as you are (probably even more)
I see :) Then so lets create the el10.2-openjdk which follows epel10.2 as was done 10.1 in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12741 (and the chain before). That woudl solve my imminent missing build,. I will stay wondering why there is no rolling epel10 (if there is rolling epel8 and epel9) .

Btw, rawhide-openjdk tracking rawhide is possible?

For your imminent needs (10.2):

Tag: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=120420
Build target: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildtargetinfo?targetID=52544

Thank you very much! Will Use asap.

As for the unresolved question. I understand it, tha tit is not possible to have
el10-openjdk nor rawhide openjdk targets, which would be following el10 and rawhide. So now they would be el10.2 and f44, but in half a year, they will automagically follow el10.3 and f45. Right? Note, that they are not mandatory for OpenJDK, and there was probably reason they were not offered at start. They would jsut make my life slightly more easy, and tbh - I'm quite curious why they can not exists (@kevin ?).

Thanx a lot for all your past and current help.

just for records 10.2 tags workls as expected.

I think moving this / setting this up should be part of the epel branching process?

I'm open to integrating this with the EPEL minor branching process, but to do that I'll need to understand the openjdk process it better. I very much do not at this point.

So now they would be el10.2 and f44, but in half a year, they will automagically follow el10.3 and f45.

This sounds like you're describing the epel10 target. It currently builds in the epel10.2-build tag with a destination of the epel10.2-testing-candidate tag. When we create 10.3 tags it will be switched to those equivalents. There is also a rawhide target which currently builds in f44-build with a destination of the f44-updates-candidate tag.

It seems like there is confusion all around. Would you be open to having a meeting to discuss this interactively? I can set that up on our work calendar if so.

@jvanek
Carl is the person that is responsible for and most knowledgeable about EPEL. Would you be interested in such a meeting so that you may get answers?