[Pulp-dev] pulp-owned pypi packages that pulp did not author

Daniel Alley dalley at redhat.com
Tue Jul 14 13:47:34 UTC 2020

My apologies!  s/Evengi/Evgeni, the letters got swapped in my brain : /

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:37 AM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:

> Reposting my response from the other thread:
> Hi Evengi,
> In the case of createrepo_c and libsolv, the upstream merged all of the
> build script changes that were necessary to enable producing Python
> packages, so in that sense the packages we are producing are completely
> unmodified.  However, the RPM team isn't particularly interested in
> maintaining Python packages, and so they gave us permission to maintain the
> packages ourselves.  I've forgotten in what medium that discussion took
> place so I'm not sure where even to look for a record of it.  Nonetheless I
> actually have a PR open against both projects which would automate the
> entire packaging and release process for Python packages with Github
> Actions, so that they could become the official owners/maintainers without
> actually needing to do any work (hopefully).
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/createrepo_c/pull/207
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libcomps/pull/69
> However you may notice that those PRs have been sitting for a while :)  In
> any case we'd definitely love to transfer ownership back to them, and I've
> been trying to facilitate that process a little bit (with the PRs) but I
> don't really want to push on them too hard to do so.
> With respect to libsolv it's a little more complicated. As far as I can
> tell the upstream is just not interested at all and would probably not
> accept the changes into upstream regardless of whether we made the release
> process automated.  I asked multiple times if they were interested and got
> essentially no response.
> https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/issues/228
> + some discussion on IRC
> Feb 24 10:14:47 <dalley> hello Igor, do you have any opinion on this?
>> https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/issues/228#issuecomment-589915584
>> Feb 24 10:18:24 <ignatenkobrain> Well, I don't see any reason to publish
>> libsolv to pypi :)
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:31 AM Evgeni Golov <evgeni at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi pulp-dev,
>> While packaging pulp3 (more precisely pulp-rpm), I stumbled over the
>> fact that the "pulp" pypi user has uploaded "solv", "libcomps" and
>> "createrepo-c" without being the real author. To make matters worse,
>> the uploads don't 100% represent the original artifacts released by
>> the respective upstreams as they don't release python packages but
>> classic tarballs. In the case of "solv" this lead to an interesting
>> bug: solv upstream does not build a python egg, but your package did,
>> and then as the pulp-rpm egg has "solv" as a dependency, it won't load on
>> a system that uses the "real solv" without the egg. We patched that
>> out in packaging, but it remains ugly.
>> I kinda understand why Pulp did that, this way you can rely on "pip"
>> to install everything for a working pulp-rpm environment, but I think
>> we/you shouldn't do that and instead either persuade (and help!) the real
>> upstreams to publish their stuff to PyPI or bite the bullet and accept
>> that pip is not able to install everything needed for a working
>> environment.
>> Thanks!
>> Evgeni
>> --
>> Beste Grüße/Kind regards,
>> Evgeni Golov
>> Senior Software Engineer
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Sitz: Grasbrunn,
>> Handelsregister: Amtsgericht München, HRB 153243,
>> Geschäftsführer: Charles Cachera, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill, Thomas
>> Savage
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200714/86a2fdc6/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list