I thought this is caused by the fact that all 3 packages have the epel7 branch as default and no master branch. Yet this hasn't happen in https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-rpm which is also the same case.

There was even a bugzilla opened now:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799952
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799943
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799955

I think I have figured out the cause:

$ koji list-pkgs  --show-blocked --tag f32 --package python3-rpm
Package                 Tag                     Extra Arches     Owner          
----------------------- ----------------------- ---------------- ---------------
python3-rpm             f32                                      releng          [BLOCKED]

$ koji list-pkgs  --show-blocked --tag f32 --package python-pip-epel
Package                 Tag                     Extra Arches     Owner          
----------------------- ----------------------- ---------------- ---------------
python-pip-epel         f32                                      releng    

https://pagure.io/releng/blob/master/f/scripts/mass-rebuild.py IMHO needs to checkout master and fail if master is not present. Leaving this open to do so and opened also https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9231

According to the EPEL FAQ, there should still be master branches for EPEL-only packages and they need to be retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Is_it_possible_to_get_a_package_only_into_EPEL_and_not_Fedora.3F

The current tool to process new package requests seems to confirm that it is still true that the master branch will be created:
https://pagure.io/fedscm-admin/blob/master/f/fedscm_admin/utils.py#_436

According to https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/component-branches/?global_component=python-pip-epel at least python-pip-epel has also active branches for f31 and master in PDC.

I filed an issue for fedscm-admin to also create the master branch in pagure when it is created in PDC:
https://pagure.io/fedscm-admin/issue/28

A fix is in https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/9232

(Even packages with a master branch but with a different default branch are possibly affected by this, not just packages not retired properly.)

According to the EPEL FAQ, there should still be master branches for EPEL-only packages and they need to be retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Is_it_possible_to_get_a_package_only_into_EPEL_and_not_Fedora.3F

Note that the "Due to technical reasons, a master branch for Rawhide will always be created." sentence predates Pagure and is no longer true.

According to the EPEL FAQ, there should still be master branches for EPEL-only packages and they need to be retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Is_it_possible_to_get_a_package_only_into_EPEL_and_not_Fedora.3F

Note that the "Due to technical reasons, a master branch for Rawhide will always be created." sentence predates Pagure and is no longer true.

The branch is still created in PDC at the moment which is the source for the koji package status and therefore this branch still needs to be retired.

That part is correct. But we should IMHO strive to "not create the branch in PDC" instead of "always create the branch in Pagure".

That part is correct. But we should IMHO strive to "not create the branch in PDC" instead of "always create the branch in Pagure".

This might be good idea but it should happen in a coordinated effort to make sure that no process expects the master branch to always exist. The current situation for the packages does not seem to be intended.

+1