Hello all,
I work on the Zenoss project and we're interested in figuring out how to get our "Zenoss Core" product into the Fedora 8 repositories so that end-users can install us via a simple "yum install zenoss". I sent a few private emails to Warren Tagomi to talk about what we had to do to be included in Fedora's repositories.
The gist of that conversation was that we would not qualify for inclusion due to our dependence on Zope 2.x, which requires Python 2.4. Our solution to that problem under Fedora (as well as on other distributions) has been to ship our own python installation with our product. Python 2.4 is installed under /opt/zenoss.
Warren suggested I look into the livna repository, and I created a ticket there that asks that we are included in their repository: http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1817
After several comments it seems like the consensus is for us to use the compat-python24 package rather than ship our own version of python. We're working on that from an engineering standpoint.
Thorsten Leemhius suggested we consider the EPEL repository since it feeds RHEL. I replied saying that we're in RHX already (but not for Zenoss Core).
I wanted to join this list to get a better idea for where we can park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product such that it is included in subsequent Fedora releases, is considered for inclusion in upcoming RHEL releases, and is possibly also included in RHX (alongside our commercial enterprise product). I'm very new to the EPEL/Livna/Fedora repository landscape, but I'm very familiar with Linux, distros, yum, up2date, and all the other infrastructure. I'm asking for a bit of help in understanding what repositories and processes feed distributions and releases so that I can understand where we should try to park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product.
Any insight (wikis/FAQs/HOWTOs) that anyone can provide would be happily accepted! :)
-c
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Christopher Blunck wrote: | Hello all, | | I work on the Zenoss project and we're interested in figuring out how to | get our "Zenoss Core" product into the Fedora 8 repositories so that | end-users can install us via a simple "yum install zenoss". I sent a | few private emails to Warren Tagomi to talk about what we had to do to | be included in Fedora's repositories. | | The gist of that conversation was that we would not qualify for | inclusion due to our dependence on Zope 2.x, which requires Python 2.4. | Our solution to that problem under Fedora (as well as on other | distributions) has been to ship our own python installation with our | product. Python 2.4 is installed under /opt/zenoss. | | Warren suggested I look into the livna repository, and I created a | ticket there that asks that we are included in their repository: | http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1817 | | After several comments it seems like the consensus is for us to use the | compat-python24 package rather than ship our own version of python. | We're working on that from an engineering standpoint. | | Thorsten Leemhius suggested we consider the EPEL repository since it | feeds RHEL. I replied saying that we're in RHX already (but not for | Zenoss Core). | | I wanted to join this list to get a better idea for where we can park | our OSS "Zenoss Core" product such that it is included in subsequent | Fedora releases, is considered for inclusion in upcoming RHEL releases, | and is possibly also included in RHX (alongside our commercial | enterprise product). I'm very new to the EPEL/Livna/Fedora repository | landscape, but I'm very familiar with Linux, distros, yum, up2date, and | all the other infrastructure. I'm asking for a bit of help in | understanding what repositories and processes feed distributions and | releases so that I can understand where we should try to park our OSS | "Zenoss Core" product. | | Any insight (wikis/FAQs/HOWTOs) that anyone can provide would be happily | accepted! :) | | | -c |
Just to get some of my thoughts out there, RHX will probably be the best place to host the "Enterprise" or no free bits. For those of you unfamiliar with RHX it is a place to obtain commercial open source, and propriety, applications that are certified on RHEL.
RHX has always envisioned a perfect world were the community/free version of the RHX product "lives" in the fedora and EPEL community, and we use these packages as a base for the RHX offerings. However its not a perfect world and I would like to work more closely to the Fedora/EPL guys then we currently do.
Some of the key questions I have for Fedora/EPEL is can Zenoss import pre-built RPM's into the EPEL repository? Or do they need to build their packages in koji. Currently RHX does not have a build system so we do take pre-build RPMs.
For Zenoss will zenoss--core run with the compat-python24 package in Fedora?
RHX would be happy to help as much as Possible however not sure what the next steps should be.
- -D
- -- David Huff Online Services R&D Red Hat, Raleigh, NC Mobile: 919-796-3553 Office: 919-754-4129 http://rhx.redhat.com
GPG Key ID: 6A20BBF7 GPG Fingerprint: FE13 8AF6 0E58 D92E A4E1 2D0A 71C1 CADF 6A20 BBF7
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:08:23 -0500 David Huff dhuff@redhat.com wrote:
Some of the key questions I have for Fedora/EPEL is can Zenoss import pre-built RPM's into the EPEL repository? Or do they need to build their packages in koji. Currently RHX does not have a build system so we do take pre-build RPMs.
They have to be built from source.
Built from .src.rpm or built from .spec?
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:08:23 -0500 David Huff dhuff@redhat.com wrote:
Some of the key questions I have for Fedora/EPEL is can Zenoss import pre-built RPM's into the EPEL repository? Or do they need to build their packages in koji. Currently RHX does not have a build system so we do take pre-build RPMs.
They have to be built from source.
-- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
Christopher Blunck (chris@zenoss.com) said:
Built from .src.rpm or built from .spec?
I'm not sure what you mean here. The build system for EPEL/Fedora builds from a src.rpm created by checking the spec and patches out of a source control system, and adding in the upstream tarball (from local storage.)
Bill
Ok cool. I did not know if you just needed a .spec file (along with the source tarballs) or if you worked off the src.rpm.
Thanks for clarifying it.
-c
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Christopher Blunck (chris@zenoss.com) said:
Built from .src.rpm or built from .spec?
I'm not sure what you mean here. The build system for EPEL/Fedora builds from a src.rpm created by checking the spec and patches out of a source control system, and adding in the upstream tarball (from local storage.)
Bill
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:37:26 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
Built from .src.rpm or built from .spec?
Yes. (:
For a longer answer... EPEL and Fedora in general maintains a source control (CVS) repository of the package .spec file, any patches, and the upstream source tarball (in a lookaside cache). It's from this source control that the package is built. However we have helper tools that will allow you to easily import an existing source rpm. If you so desire, your work on the spec and such can happen outside EPEL/Fedora's source control, and when you're ready to do a new build you can import the latest source rpm. You'll have to take care as to not stomp on any changes that may have been made directly in Fedora/EPEL though.
Since we're all OSS here is there any way that Fedora/EPEL changes to the .spec can be pushed upstream into our repository? Or are there some proprietary things you guys sometimes add to .spec files to make them work in your build environment?
-c
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:46 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:37:26 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
Built from .src.rpm or built from .spec?
Yes. (:
For a longer answer... EPEL and Fedora in general maintains a source control (CVS) repository of the package .spec file, any patches, and the upstream source tarball (in a lookaside cache). It's from this source control that the package is built. However we have helper tools that will allow you to easily import an existing source rpm. If you so desire, your work on the spec and such can happen outside EPEL/ Fedora's source control, and when you're ready to do a new build you can import the latest source rpm. You'll have to take care as to not stomp on any changes that may have been made directly in Fedora/EPEL though.
-- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:19:35 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
I wanted to join this list to get a better idea for where we can park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product such that it is included in subsequent Fedora releases, is considered for inclusion in upcoming RHEL releases, and is possibly also included in RHX (alongside our commercial enterprise product). I'm very new to the EPEL/Livna/Fedora repository landscape, but I'm very familiar with Linux, distros, yum, up2date, and all the other infrastructure. I'm asking for a bit of help in understanding what repositories and processes feed distributions and releases so that I can understand where we should try to park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product.
Any insight (wikis/FAQs/HOWTOs) that anyone can provide would be happily accepted! :)
I can give a bit of overview.
RHEL is almost directly cut from Fedora package sets. There are a few things added that aren't in Fedora, and many things removed, but getting something into a RHEL release has a much higher chance if it's in Fedora already.
EPEL is something newly created, which is an addon repository for RHEL brought to you by the Fedora community. It's a place where packages can be brought up to the RHEL standard and used by RHEL customers. If the demand is sufficient enough, there is potential to "promote" the package out of EPEL and into RHEL proper. However that comes with the cost that a Red Hat employee would have to maintain the package, and you would lose the ability to directly touch said package.
Does that help?
It helps. It sounds like the best place for us to be is in the "Fedora package sets". But based on what Warren said it seems like we are not compatible because we use our own python. The compat-python24 is a livna RPM and the livna repository is not upstream of RHEL is it?
-c
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:19:35 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
I wanted to join this list to get a better idea for where we can park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product such that it is included in subsequent Fedora releases, is considered for inclusion in upcoming RHEL releases, and is possibly also included in RHX (alongside our commercial enterprise product). I'm very new to the EPEL/Livna/Fedora repository landscape, but I'm very familiar with Linux, distros, yum, up2date, and all the other infrastructure. I'm asking for a bit of help in understanding what repositories and processes feed distributions and releases so that I can understand where we should try to park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product.
Any insight (wikis/FAQs/HOWTOs) that anyone can provide would be happily accepted! :)
I can give a bit of overview.
RHEL is almost directly cut from Fedora package sets. There are a few things added that aren't in Fedora, and many things removed, but getting something into a RHEL release has a much higher chance if it's in Fedora already.
EPEL is something newly created, which is an addon repository for RHEL brought to you by the Fedora community. It's a place where packages can be brought up to the RHEL standard and used by RHEL customers. If the demand is sufficient enough, there is potential to "promote" the package out of EPEL and into RHEL proper. However that comes with the cost that a Red Hat employee would have to maintain the package, and you would lose the ability to directly touch said package.
Does that help?
-- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:17:55 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
It helps. It sounds like the best place for us to be is in the "Fedora package sets". But based on what Warren said it seems like we are not compatible because we use our own python. The compat-python24 is a livna RPM and the livna repository is not upstream of RHEL is it?
Correct, the dependency on the older python will keep you out of Fedora proper for now. However you won't have that issue in EPEL, since EPEL-5 (for RHEL5) still uses python2.4.
Livna is not one of the direct paths into RHEL, that is also correct.
So if we don't ship our own python but instead rely on the compat- python24 module we could be accepted to EPEL?
Will EPEL be included in /etc/yum.repos.d in future Fedora releases?
If compat-python24 is promoted into Fedora proper would that then mean we would be a candidate for inclusion in Fedora proper?
Is there any likelihood that compat-python24 will be promoted into Fedora proper?
Sorry for all the questions... Just trying to better understand all the different groups, projects, and policies. :)
Thank you all for your help so far in understanding the environment.
-c
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:17:55 -0500 Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
It helps. It sounds like the best place for us to be is in the "Fedora package sets". But based on what Warren said it seems like we are not compatible because we use our own python. The compat-python24 is a livna RPM and the livna repository is not upstream of RHEL is it?
Correct, the dependency on the older python will keep you out of Fedora proper for now. However you won't have that issue in EPEL, since EPEL-5 (for RHEL5) still uses python2.4.
Livna is not one of the direct paths into RHEL, that is also correct.
-- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Friday 18 January 2008, Christopher Blunck wrote:
So if we don't ship our own python but instead rely on the compat- python24 module we could be accepted to EPEL?
using the system python you could be in EPEL RHEL5 includes python-2.4 RHEL4 python-2.3
Will EPEL be included in /etc/yum.repos.d in future Fedora releases?
EPEL is for RHEL most but not all EPEL packages are already in fedora
If compat-python24 is promoted into Fedora proper would that then mean we would be a candidate for inclusion in Fedora proper?
if then yes
Is there any likelihood that compat-python24 will be promoted into Fedora proper?
highly unlikely. hopefully plone/zope will be made to work with python-2.5+ then you will be ok to go into fedora.
Sorry for all the questions... Just trying to better understand all the different groups, projects, and policies. :)
Thank you all for your help so far in understanding the environment.
-c
On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:17:55 -0500
Christopher Blunck chris@zenoss.com wrote:
It helps. It sounds like the best place for us to be is in the "Fedora package sets". But based on what Warren said it seems like we are not compatible because we use our own python. The compat-python24 is a livna RPM and the livna repository is not upstream of RHEL is it?
Correct, the dependency on the older python will keep you out of Fedora proper for now. However you won't have that issue in EPEL, since EPEL-5 (for RHEL5) still uses python2.4.
Livna is not one of the direct paths into RHEL, that is also correct.
-- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
Christopher Blunck (chris@zenoss.com) said:
Thorsten Leemhius suggested we consider the EPEL repository since it feeds RHEL. I replied saying that we're in RHX already (but not for Zenoss Core).
I wanted to join this list to get a better idea for where we can park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product such that it is included in subsequent Fedora releases, is considered for inclusion in upcoming RHEL releases, and is possibly also included in RHX (alongside our commercial enterprise product). I'm very new to the EPEL/Livna/Fedora repository landscape, but I'm very familiar with Linux, distros, yum, up2date, and all the other infrastructure. I'm asking for a bit of help in understanding what repositories and processes feed distributions and releases so that I can understand where we should try to park our OSS "Zenoss Core" product.
Any insight (wikis/FAQs/HOWTOs) that anyone can provide would be happily accepted! :)
From a raw technical standpoint:
- All repos must be internally consistent - Fedora can only require Fedora packages - EPEL can only require RHEL + EPEL packages - Livna can only require Fedora + Livna packages (presumably)
So, where your stuff goes depends on where its dependencies go, essentially. That being said, it's possible to have apps in EPEL but not the latest Fedora, even if that's not preferred (I think - there may be EPEL guidelines against this.)
Bill
On 18.01.2008 19:19, Christopher Blunck wrote:
I work on the Zenoss project and we're interested in figuring out how to get our "Zenoss Core" product into the Fedora 8 repositories so that end-users can install us via a simple "yum install zenoss".
As mentioned in the livna bug the already it seems to me the best way forward is this:
- you submit zenoss to Fedora, but it's only going to be imported to EPEL, as there is no proper python in F7 and F8 (which is a shame, but that's a different topic), but one in RHEL4 and RHEL5, which should be fine to use for zenoss; EPEL users then can run "yum install zenoss" on their RHEL/CentOS boxes with EPEL configured
- RHX can then start to pull from EPEL if they want (which afaics is the case)
- once it got reviewed and approved for EPEL it's automatically approved for livna as well; thus livna can import a slightly modified spec file that depends on compat-python24 which is in livna already; thus fedora users with livna configured can run "yum install zenoss"
- sooner or later zenoss and its deps will be compatible to python 2.5; then it's can be just build for Fedora, as it's a approved package for already; then it can be removed from Livna and all Fedora users can run "yum install zenoss" to get it
Does that sound like a plan? Sure, we could review and import zenoss for livna now as well and ignore EPEL, but that would mean you'd need another review to get zenoss into Fedora once zenoss and its deps are compatible to python 2.5.
HTH
CU knurd
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org