EPEL 7 package requests: pyephem, blt, tcllib, tdom

[Kyle Lanclos]

Hi folks--

Our production Linux platform is CentOS, and EPEL nicely bridges the
gap between the base package set and what we need to support our
application base. I am grateful for the collective effort behind EPEL.

With just a handful of additional packages in EPEL 7, we would be
ready to begin rolling out CentOS 7. What I can I do to help bring
these packages into the fold?

	blt
	blt-devel
	pyephem
	tcllib
	tdom

All of the above are in EPEL 6, and are in Fedora.

Much obliged,

--Kyle

[Christopher Meng]

This list is not the right place to discuss these stuffs.

If you want to let them land in the EPEL7,  please fill bugs in Bugzilla
against the relevant component. I'm sure most of the owners of those
packages may not subscribe to this list.

[Kyle Lanclos]

Christopher Meng wrote:
>  This list is not the right place to discuss these stuffs.
>
>  If you want to let them land in the EPEL7,** please fill bugs in Bugzilla
>  against the relevant component. 
Thanks for the pointer, I'll see if I can successfully navigate bugzilla.
The directions here:

	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_...

...are not very explicit about how to use an existing review ticket to
properly submit a package change request.

Much obliged,

--Kyle

[Christopher Meng]

I guess you even don't know how to use Bugzilla.

I've closed your requests in the bugzilla.

Standard procedure:

1. Check if someone has requested:

http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/$(PACKAGE_NAME)

Replace that PACKAGE_NAME with the actual name, like blt, tcllib.

2. If not, click the button in the page and report one.

If this package has EL branch, file a bug under EL first, if you can't
get any responses, file one under Fedora then.

3. Wait.

[Kyle Lanclos]

Christopher Meng wrote:
>  I guess you even don't know how to use Bugzilla. 
Quite right. It's something I encounter once or twice a year, if that.

>  Standard procedure: 
I followed the procedure outlined in the FAQ:

	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ
	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#How_do_I_request_a_EPEL_branch_fo...
	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_...

Using the search form presented here:

	http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/

...I successfully located the review tickets for most of the packages
in the subject line, and followed the instructions on requesting a
branch for EPEL7. I was unable to find a review ticket for the blt
package, so I created one, following the instructions linked in the
FAQ.

As I am otherwise uninformed about how the established community prefers
to use Bugzilla, I'm relying on the documentation to steer me straight.

>  3. Wait. 
I'm totally there.

--Kyle

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 21:06:47 -0700
Kyle Lanclos <lanclos(a)ucolick.org&gt; wrote:

>  Christopher Meng wrote:
>  > I guess you even don't know how to use Bugzilla.
>  
>  Quite right. It's something I encounter once or twice a year, if that.
>  
>  > Standard procedure:
>  
>  I followed the procedure outlined in the FAQ:
>  
>  	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ
>
> 	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#How_do_I_request_a_EPEL_branch_fo...
>
> 	https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_...
>  
>  Using the search form presented here:
>  
>  	http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/
>  
>  ...I successfully located the review tickets for most of the packages
>  in the subject line, and followed the instructions on requesting a
>  branch for EPEL7. I was unable to find a review ticket for the blt
>  package, so I created one, following the instructions linked in the
>  FAQ. 
Those are the instructions if you are a fedora maintainer... if you are
just an interested user, the process is much simpiler: 

File a bug on the epel version of the package and ask if the
maintainer would be willing to maintain it for epel7 as well. 
If there's no answer in 1 week, another maintainer could step in, at
that point you could ask the list if anyone would be willing to step in
and maintain it. 

We need to make the faq more clear on this point... 

kevin

[Zhiwei Zhu]

Hi Kevin,

Thanks for clarifying this:
" Those are the instructions if you are a fedora maintainer... if you are just an
interested user, the process is much simpiler:

File a bug on the epel version of the package and ask if the maintainer would be willing
to maintain it for epel7 as well.
If there's no answer in 1 week, another maintainer could step in, at that point you
could ask the list if anyone would be willing to step in and maintain it. "

And couldn't agree more on:
" We need to make the faq more clear on this point... "

I faced the same problem with Kyle and got the same understanding as Kyle did.
I made a different mistake by editing:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7/Requests#EPEL_Branch_Requests



------------------------------
Best Regards
Jacky


-----Original Message-----
From: epel-devel-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Kevin Fenzi
Sent: Tuesday, 22 July 2014 4:26 AM
To: epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: EPEL 7 package requests: pyephem, blt, tcllib, tdom

On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 21:06:47 -0700
Kyle Lanclos <lanclos(a)ucolick.org&gt; wrote:

>  Christopher Meng wrote:
>  > I guess you even don't know how to use Bugzilla.
>
>  Quite right. It's something I encounter once or twice a year, if that.
>
>  > Standard procedure:
>
>  I followed the procedure outlined in the FAQ:
>
>        https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ
>       
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#How_do_I_request_a_EPEL_branch_fo...
>
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Chan
>  ge_Requests_for_existing_packages
>
>  Using the search form presented here:
>
>        http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/
>
>  ...I successfully located the review tickets for most of the packages
>  in the subject line, and followed the instructions on requesting a
>  branch for EPEL7. I was unable to find a review ticket for the blt
>  package, so I created one, following the instructions linked in the
>  FAQ. 
Those are the instructions if you are a fedora maintainer... if you are just an interested
user, the process is much simpiler:

File a bug on the epel version of the package and ask if the maintainer would be willing
to maintain it for epel7 as well.
If there's no answer in 1 week, another maintainer could step in, at that point you
could ask the list if anyone would be willing to step in and maintain it.

We need to make the faq more clear on this point...

kevin
[wargaming.net]
EgzO3mXGcK
This e-mail may contain CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION and/or PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION intended solely for the recipient and, therefore, may not be
retransmitted to any party outside of the recipient's organization without the prior
written consent of the sender. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the
sender immediately by telephone or reply e-mail and destroy the original message without
making a copy. Wargaming.net accepts no liability for any losses or damages resulting from
infected e-mail transmissions and viruses in e-mail attachment. kgzO3mXGcg

[Christopher Meng]

Actually the epel7 Request page should only be edited by the existing
packagers, or someone may get annoyed.

[Zhiwei Zhu]

Hi Christopher,

I have removed the part added by me. Sorry for the mistake.


------------------------------
Best Regards
Jacky


-----Original Message-----
From: epel-devel-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Christopher Meng
Sent: Tuesday, 22 July 2014 11:09 AM
To: EPEL Development List
Subject: Re: EPEL 7 package requests: pyephem, blt, tcllib, tdom

Actually the epel7 Request page should only be edited by the existing packagers, or
someone may get annoyed.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
[wargaming.net]
EgzO3mXGcK
This e-mail may contain CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION and/or PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION intended solely for the recipient and, therefore, may not be
retransmitted to any party outside of the recipient's organization without the prior
written consent of the sender. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the
sender immediately by telephone or reply e-mail and destroy the original message without
making a copy. Wargaming.net accepts no liability for any losses or damages resulting from
infected e-mail transmissions and viruses in e-mail attachment. kgzO3mXGcg

[Christopher Meng]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Zhiwei Zhu <z_zhu(a)wargaming.net&gt; wrote:
>  Hi Christopher,
>
>  I have removed the part added by me. Sorry for the mistake. 
Well no problem, you are new to here ;)

We need to focus on these packages now as they are required by people.

Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng

http://cicku.me