Extras Buildsys

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Jan 1 19:53:47 UTC 2007


On Mon, 2007-01-01 at 12:32 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 01 Jan 2007 12:58:50 -0600
> tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) wrote:
> 
> > >>>>> "DG" == Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> writes:
> > 
> > DG> Just a note to all, the buildsys no longer accepts jobs for Extras
> > DG> for FC-3 and FC-4
> > 
> > Since that's the case, perhaps we could trim FC3 and FC4 from the EVR
> > problem report.  There now seems to be no possibility of fixing those
> > issues.
> 
> Yeah, that leaves us with in extras: 
> 
> andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de:
>     wine-docs
>       FE3 > FE4 (0:0.9.27-1.fc3 > 0:0.9.24-1.fc4)
> 
This is held up on this bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852

wine-docs on FC-4 is out of sync with the other wine packages as well:
The wine-docs rpm from FC-3 is actually a better match for the FC-4 wine
than the older wine-docs.

> 
> Two other end of life issues someone needs to address: 
> 
> - Is someone going to close all the legacy/FE/FC <5 bugs in bugzilla? 
> 
> Looks like there are 77 or so for fe3/fe4.
> Around 841 in fc1/fc2/fc3/fc4
> Around 107 in legacy. 
> 
IMHO, it would be best if the package maintainer does this.  Look at the
open bugs on your packages.  Decide whether to push them forward, close
them, or mark them NEEDINFO so that the bug reporter has the opportunity
to push them forward (like Davej's treatment of kernel bugs.)

> - I seem to remember that the infrastructure team was for some reason
> using some fc/fe3 packages on the builders or other infrastructure
> machines. Can we make sure those get branched/maintained for epel and
> any machines switched to those new packages? 
> 
Machines which are using RHEL4 (Most everything except the builders)
were using fe/fc3 packages when necessary.  epel will be a better fit
for these cases and we've started using this now... We haven't
completely converted yet, though.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070101/162e9dd4/attachment.sig>


More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list