12:45 a.m.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Keywords: |
----------------------------+----------------------------
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers...
defines the criteria to unretire packages in Fedora and in EPEL if the
package is still active in Fedora. However there is now a request to
unretire a package that is also retired in all branches for more than two
weeks (at least in pkgdb):
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-
devel/2014-September/010212.html
Therefore the question is, whether a re-review is required. IMHO it does
not make much sense for EPEL, since there should be no guideline changes
that require adjusting the EPEL SPEC files. Nevertheless, I would like to
get a consensus on this.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
5:48 a.m.
Excerpts from Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux's message of 2014-10-01 07:45:38
+0200:
--
--
Steve Traylen, CERN IT.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Keywords: |
----------------------------+----------------------------
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers...
defines the criteria to unretire packages in Fedora and in EPEL if the
package is still active in Fedora. However there is now a request to
unretire a package that is also retired in all branches for more than two
weeks (at least in pkgdb):
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-
devel/2014-September/010212.html
Therefore the question is, whether a re-review is required. IMHO it does
not make much sense for EPEL, since there should be no guideline changes
that require adjusting the EPEL SPEC files. Nevertheless, I would like to
get a consensus on this.
It's definitely needed I would say for this particular case. I think the
EPEL maintainers had no idea the pkg orphaning in fedora was going to lead
the a complete retirement in all branches.
I'm kind of amazed this has never (obviously) happened before. (I'm interested in
classadds.)
4:45 p.m.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Comment (by smooge):
I agree that reviews for such things do not make sense for EPEL. If we
have them, I wonder if there is an expedited way of doing so?
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:1>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
11:55 a.m.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Comment (by smooge):
Update to ticket. We did not have a full body of committee members on
2014-10-03 meeting so are going to put this to the next meeting.
Second note. We are going to look at reviewing xerces-c using old method
so that broken deps can be dealt with.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:2>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
3:38 p.m.
New subject: [Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux] #4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Comment (by smooge):
Agreed by bstinson, Evolution, smooge, nirik
a) smooge volunteers to be a reviewer who will do reviews of needed
packages on Friday afternoons after I have been retrained.
b) We have a bug-killing day once a month where CentOS packagers help
c) We expect all packages that have been removed from the collection over
14 days to be re-reviewed. [This is to match upstream FESCO policy]
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:3>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
3:38 p.m.
New subject: [Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux] #4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: task | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: fixed | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Changes (by smooge):
* resolution: => fixed
* type: defect => task
* status: new => closed
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:4>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
2:47 a.m.
New subject: [Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux] #4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: task | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: fixed | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Comment (by till):
Replying to [comment:3 smooge]:
Is this now documented somewhere? Is there someone to coordinate the bug-
killing day? I guess there should be a wiki page about the bug-killing day
some planning with announcements about when it will be.
And for others, that might be interested, the relevant meeting log is
here:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/epel/2014-10-31/epel.2014-10-31-20.01.html
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:5>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
Agreed by bstinson, Evolution, smooge, nirik
a) smooge volunteers to be a reviewer who will do reviews of needed
packages on
Friday afternoons after I have been retrained.
b) We have a bug-killing day once a month where CentOS packagers
help
c) We expect all packages that have been removed from the collection
over 14 days
to be re-reviewed. [This is to match upstream FESCO policy]
12:55 a.m.
New subject: [EPEL] #4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
#4: Decide on criteria to unretire packages.
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: epel-wranglers
Type: task | Status: reopened
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Policy problem | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+----------------------------
Changes (by till):
* resolution: fixed =>
* status: closed => reopened
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/epel/ticket/4#comment:6>
EPEL <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL>
Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
3140
days inactive
3174
days old
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
7 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
EPEL -
Steve Traylen