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

Daniel Alley dalley at redhat.com
Wed Jul 15 11:53:47 UTC 2020

 The patch is fairly small, but you're definitely not wrong about that. I'm
just not sure if there's better options unfortunately.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 6:37 AM Evgeni Golov <evgeni at redhat.com> wrote:

> Thanks for all the explanations!
> I think my main concerns are the fact that we (well, really, you) end up
> having to maintain this libsolv "fork" essentially forever (in contrast to
> the others, where you currently just need to upload the releases) and users
> get a slightly different result depending how they install libsolv --
> especially if used in other projects.
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 5:22 PM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Daniel,
>>> I've reposted to pulp-dev, so you might want to re-post your reply
>>> there too, but:
>>> Great, if createrepo and libcomps is just "intermediate" while we
>>> actively (try) to help upstream get there, I can totally take that.
>>> For solv: well, if they don't want it there, IMHO we should not
>>> publish it under their name either?
>> It's not so much that they didn't want it there; more that they don't
>> care about that use case at all and it's not something that they want to
>> maintain or think about.  Similar to the situation with createrepo_c except
>> that there was less hope that they would eventually take back control :)
>> The primary reason is just that we wanted it to be possible to run the
>> RPM plugin on Debian-based distros, and relying on any RPMs would go
>> counter to that goal.  But there were some other motivations also - at the
>> time, the Python community was deciding on which technology to use for the
>> new dependency resolver in Pip, and libsolv was mentioned as a candidate
>> (but ultimately decided against for various reasons).  One of the reasons
>> was that nobody had ever made a Python package for libsolv and they weren't
>> even sure if it was possible - and I found this discussion at the same time
>> as I was already wanting to package it anyway for Pulp.
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:47 AM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 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
> --
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200715/a6a423ea/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list