Re: Beta 1.4.0b0 available [Re: Release Plan]

[Patrik Dufresne]

@EricZolf
I'm confused about how you manage to build the binaries packages (.whl).
It's not part of any pipeline so I'm guessing you have compiled them
manually ?

--
Patrik Dufresne Service Logiciel inc.
http://www.patrikdufresne.com <http://patrikdufresne.com/>/
514-971-6442
130 rue Doris
St-Colomban, QC J5K 1T9


On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 7:18 AM <address@hidden> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> thanks for the flowers but it's team work.
>
> On 23/11/2019 12:58, Frank Crawford wrote:
> > I'll also see if I can push a version to Fedora rawhide over the
> > weekend, so you can pull down the current RPM for it.
>
> That would be great, I'm on Fedora 31. From [1] I think you could close
> the Python 2 and the EPEL 8 bug with the next release.
>
> As a side note, I discovered the 3rd bug about restore-as-of - I haven't
> understood at first lecture, need to have a deeper look and perhaps
> create an upstream issue...
>
> >> Remember: it's a beta version, be careful!
> >>
> >> - if you're confused or not sure, ask on this mailing list
> >> - if you find a bug, create an issue on GitHub with rdiff-backup
> >> version, OS and its version, command and log with -v9 verbosity.
> >
> > I think I need to push a couple of small changes to the RPM spec file
> > templates to build with SCM, that can wait until I've tested with the
> > Fedora build system.
>
> Yes, I've always had mixed feelings about upstream packages, they can
> only be generic, where most distributions actually need specific packages.
>
> Thanks, Eric
>
> [1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/rdiff-backup/bugs/#
>
>