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
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.
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_Req...
...are not very explicit about how to use an existing review ticket to properly submit a package change request.
Much obliged,
--Kyle
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.
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_for_a... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_Req...
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.
- Wait.
I'm totally there.
--Kyle
On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 21:06:47 -0700 Kyle Lanclos lanclos@ucolick.org 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_for_a... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_Req...
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
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@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:epel-devel-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Fenzi Sent: Tuesday, 22 July 2014 4:26 AM To: epel-devel@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@ucolick.org 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_for_an_existing_Fedora_package.3Fhttps://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
Actually the epel7 Request page should only be edited by the existing packagers, or someone may get annoyed.
Hi Christopher,
I have removed the part added by me. Sorry for the mistake.
------------------------------ Best Regards Jacky
-----Original Message----- From: epel-devel-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:epel-devel-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org] 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@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
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Zhiwei Zhu z_zhu@wargaming.net 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
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Christopher Meng -
Kevin Fenzi -
Kyle Lanclos -
Zhiwei Zhu