On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Martin Perina <mperina(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Gil Shinar <gshinar(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Eyal, I have tried to reach you last evening with no success so I told
>> Sandro that it is his call.
>> I've talked with Danken this morning and he said that this permutation
>> should be excluded so I have abandon my patch.
>>
>> Thanks all
>> Gil
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Eyal Edri <eedri(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Irit Goihman <igoihman(a)redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I see fc24 was excluded from master jobs:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/69233/10/jobs/confs/projects/vdsm/vdsm_stand...
>>>
>>>
>>> I think at the time of the patch there was agreement we build only
>>> latest fedora, so 25 instead of 24.
>>>
>>> Anyway, its up to the maintainer, but I vote to build fc25 since fc24
>>> will also be EOL in a few months time.
>
>
> As I said in different thread VDSM can be built for FC25, but it cannot be
> used [1]. So FC24 is the latest usable version ...
>
> [1]
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414075
Dan, Eyal, please reach a fedora version usable status.
Either we move to fc25 (or later) or we stay to fc24, but we need CI to be
able to build and run it.
We can't leave CI broken.