On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 02:29:48PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:19:20 +0100 > Till Maas <opensource till name> wrote: > > Also the "Getting a Fedora package in EPEL"[0] procedure is not in > > sync with what CVS admins require, as they might require a > > confirmation that a maintainer has been asked: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243716#c15 > > But this is not what the procedure describes. > > > > [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Getting_a_Fedora_package_in_EPEL > > I can add clarification there. Basically he was just asking: "have you > talked to the Fedora maintainer about maintaining this in EPEL". > > The answer could just have been "yes, I have". Are you sure? Because I believe I told him in IRC that the gitolite maintainer asked the perl-Text-Markdown maintainer via e-mail, because the gitolite maintainer wrote this in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548324#c20, which I referred to in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243716#c11 Also on IRC the CVS admin said something that the perl-Text-Markdown maintainer required that he acked all EL branch requests, before they would be performed. Hey also used this in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243716#c12 Nevertheless, if there was only some miscommunication and it still will be enough to just ask the maintainer and mention this on a branch request to get the branch for EPEL done, then everything is fine. Regards Till
Attachment:
pgpXYJsNKXuya.pgp
Description: PGP signature