#304 EPEL 10.0 mass branching
Closed: Fixed by dherrera. Opened by carlwgeorge.

In approximately 2025 Q1, we will perform a mass branching event to create epel10.0 branches. This will be similar to a Fedora mass branching event, but instead of creating new branches on every package, we need to only do this for packages that have an epel10 branch. We need to investigate if the Fedora mass branching script will work for this, and document the steps in a proper SOP.


Uploaded a draft of the branching SOP based on Fedora Release's SOP https://pagure.io/infra-docs-fpo/pull-request/357

We talked about this during the 20250205 meeting. Some notes:

  • Command to tag all packages
koji clone-tag --all --latest-only epel10.0 epel10.1
  • nirik suggest to have someone outside of releng to execute this so it doesn't block on releng's team availability.
  • A trial can be done on staging koji after a sync, which will most likely happen anyway after fedora's branching finishes.

Just an update on this.
Have received lots of feedback on the minor branching SOP https://pagure.io/infra-docs-fpo/pull-request/357

Added some scripts based on the Fedora branching https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/12573

And now we have permissions on staging, which is WIP

Also related https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/2473

Metadata Update from @carlwgeorge:
- Issue tagged with: high-gain, high-trouble

Here's a recap of the past few days.

We brought up the topic of how to handle builds getting builds in pending and testing status for EPEL 10.0 into the EPEL 10.1 repo. At least this time around, we gathered a list and will manually tag them for epel10.1 once they reach stable status and get the epel10.0 tag.

There was a new pull request to add a new flag to the mass-branching-git.py script so we can use it for both fedora and epel, which was tested in staging and then merged.

The pull request with the mass branching scripts was merged. Prior to merging we tested get_all_active_packages_branching.sh and make-koji-release-tags in staging, and made a few adjustment based on what we learned. We needed a few more adjustments based on what we learned running it in prod with are in this pull request that is yet to be merged. One observation here is that create_empty_repos.sh didn't seem to be very useful, and for the next mass branching we'll probably skip it and try another method, such as copying the repo or symlinking the virtual names to the same previous compose.

The pull request for various ansible things related to mass branching was merged. It needed a few follow up PRs (first, second) to adjust the bodhi pungi template to use the correct comps filename.

The pull request for the mass branching SOP has not yet been merged, but we have quite a few additional notes to add about things we learned.

Oh, and we did the actual mass branching in production today! We've got several follow up items but overall it went well.

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7HPSCQDLFOZWNF4WACDDMULJCXZDVJRP/

Metadata Update from @carlwgeorge:
- Issue tagged with: meeting

Metadata Update from @carlwgeorge:
- Issue untagged with: meeting

At least this time around, we gathered a list and will manually tag them for epel10.1 once they reach stable status and get the epel10.0 tag.

I've been checking in on this list every few days, and have tagged most of the builds over. I'll keep monitoring the stragglers to finish it up.

The process was excecuted and the last pending PRs (fixes and SOP) have been merged, so I'll close this issue :)

Metadata Update from @dherrera:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

This issue has been migrated to Fedora Forge:
https://forge.fedoraproject.org/epel/steering/issues/304

Please continue any further discussion there.

Metadata