Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Kevin, oclock was not updated, and Beson's email made me realize that I could go an do it myself. I did that by the time you check. slim's was updated and both packages are now in testing. Best, Ranjan On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 10:49:44 AM CDT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 02:04:57PM +0300, Benson Muite wrote: > Ranjan, > > On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > > Thanks! The package was cleared on BZ some time ago. Is there some > > additional review that is needed? > > > Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have > been unretired: > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417 Yep. > Though project ownership has not been updated: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock It looks updated to me? Did I miss something there? Do let me know in the ticket if so. > It seems Slim has been unretired: > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310 > and project ownership updated: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim > Maybe just need to add the new files? Yes, it should be unretired and all ready to push commits to/build/update. kevin ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 02:04:57PM +0300, Benson Muite wrote: > Ranjan, > > On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > > Thanks! The package was cleared on BZ some time ago. Is there some > > additional review that is needed? > > > Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have > been unretired: > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417 Yep. > Though project ownership has not been updated: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock It looks updated to me? Did I miss something there? Do let me know in the ticket if so. > It seems Slim has been unretired: > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310 > and project ownership updated: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim > Maybe just need to add the new files? Yes, it should be unretired and all ready to push commits to/build/update. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Ranjan, On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Thanks! The package was cleared on BZ some time ago. Is there some > additional review that is needed? > Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have been unretired: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417 Though project ownership has not been updated: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oclock It seems Slim has been unretired: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11310 and project ownership updated: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slim Maybe just need to add the new files? > Best wishes, > Ranjan > > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 14-05-2023 12:40, Benson Muite wrote: It seems it is just the review that is needed: The re-review is done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138 Releng unretiring the package is the next step, really. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Benson, Thanks! The package was cleared on BZ some time ago. Is there some additional review that is needed? Best wishes, Ranjan On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 05:41:35 AM CDT, Benson Muite wrote: Hi Ranjan, Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages. On 5/14/23 03:27, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Thanks, Kevin! No problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, > hence the questions. Thanks again! > > It seems it is just the review that is needed: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_orphan_and_retired_packages/#unorphaning_and_unretiring_packages https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming Generally reviews go faster if the person asking for the review does a review of another package - many people ask for review swaps on this list. For a package with a reviewer you can add NEEDINFO in bugzilla so that if an person has assigned themselves as reviewer does not respond after a while, a new reviewer can take it up. > > > > > On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote: > >> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: >>> Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not >>> even a request for additional information. >> >> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the >> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. >> >> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. > > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 14-05-2023 00:45, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Thanks, Sandro! How does one ping in the ticket on paguire? The easiest way is to just leave a comment in the ticket. If you need info from a specific person you would tag that person (@fas_user). That ensures people watching the ticket queue get another notification, bringing the ticket to their attention again. But since Kevin already explained the delay, there's no need for that now. Either Kevin or the person returning from PTO next week will surely pick it up. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Hi Ranjan, Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages. On 5/14/23 03:27, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Thanks, Kevin! No problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, > hence the questions. Thanks again! > > It seems it is just the review that is needed: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_orphan_and_retired_packages/#unorphaning_and_unretiring_packages https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming Generally reviews go faster if the person asking for the review does a review of another package - many people ask for review swaps on this list. For a package with a reviewer you can add NEEDINFO in bugzilla so that if an person has assigned themselves as reviewer does not respond after a while, a new reviewer can take it up. > > > > > On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote: > >> On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: >>> Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not >>> even a request for additional information. >> >> Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the >> meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. >> >> Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. > > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Thanks, Kevin! No problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, hence the questions. Thanks again! On Saturday, May 13, 2023 at 06:12:33 PM CDT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote: > On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > > Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not > > even a request for additional information. > > Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the > meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. > > Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. FYI, the main release engineer who usually processes these was on pto last week, and I (who do release engineering work in my 'spare' time) didn't have any time to get to any. If there's urgency on any request, please do note that in the ticket... We are working on automating unretire requests... hopefully that will land before too long. Otherwise we will get to them as soon as we can. I might be able to do some this weekend, but I am trying to catch up on around the house/yard tasks, so no promises. :) kevin ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 02:41:10AM +0200, Sandro wrote: > On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > > Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not > > even a request for additional information. > > Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the > meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. > > Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. FYI, the main release engineer who usually processes these was on pto last week, and I (who do release engineering work in my 'spare' time) didn't have any time to get to any. If there's urgency on any request, please do note that in the ticket... We are working on automating unretire requests... hopefully that will land before too long. Otherwise we will get to them as soon as we can. I might be able to do some this weekend, but I am trying to catch up on around the house/yard tasks, so no promises. :) kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Thanks, Sandro! How does one ping in the ticket on paguire? On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 07:41:47 PM CDT, Sandro wrote: On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even > a request for additional information. Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 11-05-2023 17:57, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even a request for additional information. Tags have been added to the ticket. So, it has come up in one of the meetings. Supposedly, no-one has found the time yet to work on it. Feel free to ping in the ticket or bring it up in one of the meetings. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Still no movement on my unretire requests for both slim and oclock, not even a request for additional information. On Sunday, May 7, 2023 at 10:50:42 AM CDT, Sandro wrote: On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it > was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this > request last evening. I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday. See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396 -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
I see, thanks! I had indeed forgotten that the previous request had been closed. On Sunday, May 7, 2023 at 10:50:42 AM CDT, Sandro wrote: On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it > was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this > request last evening. I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday. See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396 -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 07-05-2023 17:34, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this request last evening. I don't think it's fully automated. It's a member of the releng team that has to process it. They will be back on duty on Monday. See for example te previous unretirement request for oclock: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396 -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
How long does it take to unretire a package? I was thinking that it was automatic, but I have not received any notification yet. Did this request last evening. On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 07:25:30 PM CDT, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Thank you for this. I got: fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/oclock-1.0.4-4.fc37.src.rpm Removing no longer used file: dead.package Could not execute import_srpm: This package or module is retired. The action has stopped. so I guess I have request unretirement. I thought I did it sometime ago, but maybe not. Thanks again! On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 04:52:55 PM CDT, Sandro wrote: On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote: > On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: >> Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after >> F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. >> It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! > > Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to > '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a > dist-git repo. Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement&title=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E now the package is approved. Sorry for the confusion. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Thank you for this. I got: fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/oclock-1.0.4-4.fc37.src.rpm Removing no longer used file: dead.package Could not execute import_srpm: This package or module is retired. The action has stopped. so I guess I have request unretirement. I thought I did it sometime ago, but maybe not. Thanks again! On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 04:52:55 PM CDT, Sandro wrote: On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote: > On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: >> Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after >> F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. >> It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! > > Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to > '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a > dist-git repo. Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement&title=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E now the package is approved. Sorry for the confusion. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 06-05-2023 23:43, Sandro wrote: On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a dist-git repo. Or rather file a releng ticket requesting unretirement at https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue?template=package_unretirement&title=Unretire%20%3Cpkgname%3E now the package is approved. Sorry for the confusion. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On 06-05-2023 19:36, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! Looks like the package is approved. The fedora-review flag is set to '+', meaning approved. You should be able to proceed with requesting a dist-git repo. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Sorry, forgot the BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138 On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 12:36:20 PM CDT, Globe Trotter wrote: Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 02:43:00 PM CST, Björn Persson wrote: Ben Beasley wrote: > Please compare with > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec, > paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have > gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using > hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead. To elaborate on this, the procedure described in xfontsel.spec finds the key that was used to make the signature, so whoever made the signature becomes the trusted upstream. If you do that *once*, it's a form of trust on first use. It lets you discover future attacks as long as you continue using the same key, assuming that you got the right key to begin with. If you would repeat the key lookup every time you upgrade the package, then you would render the verification meaningless. You'd just be verifying that the tarball was signed by whoever signed the tarball. So don't do that. Björn Persson ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Can someone please review the oclock package? This was orphaned after F35, and I packaged it for myself, and then would like to put it up. It was tentatively approved, but never finally done so. Thanks! On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 02:43:00 PM CST, Björn Persson wrote: Ben Beasley wrote: > Please compare with > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec, > paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have > gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using > hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead. To elaborate on this, the procedure described in xfontsel.spec finds the key that was used to make the signature, so whoever made the signature becomes the trusted upstream. If you do that *once*, it's a form of trust on first use. It lets you discover future attacks as long as you continue using the same key, assuming that you got the right key to begin with. If you would repeat the key lookup every time you upgrade the package, then you would render the verification meaningless. You'd just be verifying that the tarball was signed by whoever signed the tarball. So don't do that. Björn Persson ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Hi,
Globe Trotter via devel writes:
> Thank you to Dan Čermák for reviewing this package. However, I had two
> questions from his comments. The first was that the spec file should use
> gpgverify.
> So, I went to the suggested webpage:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_source_file_verification
> and did the following to get my signature
>
> Source0: https://www.x.org/pub/individual/app/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> Source1: %{source0}.sig
>
> but can not tell how to get the gpg keyring from the site.
>
> Second, it is also suggested that I start using rpmautospec, as that will
> make package maintenance simpler in the long run. I like that of course, but
> I am trying to understand where this is used?
rpmautospec reduces the necessary churn when updating packages, in the
simplest case it boils down to this:
- use `Release: %autorelease` instead of bumping it yourself
- don't write the %changelog yourself, just put:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
%changelog
%autochangelog
--8<---cut here---end--->8---
at the bottom of the spec
The rpmautospec automation will then bump the release via %autorelease
on each git commit and put every commit message into the changelog.
This has the huge advantage, that it makes updating across all branches
rather easy as you do not have to resolve merge conflicts due to
diverging changelogs or different release numbers any more.
Hope this explains it a bit, feel free to reach out directly if you've
got further questions,
Dan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Ben Beasley wrote: > Please compare with > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec, > paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have > gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using > hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead. To elaborate on this, the procedure described in xfontsel.spec finds the key that was used to make the signature, so whoever made the signature becomes the trusted upstream. If you do that *once*, it's a form of trust on first use. It lets you discover future attacks as long as you continue using the same key, assuming that you got the right key to begin with. If you would repeat the key lookup every time you upgrade the package, then you would render the verification meaningless. You'd just be verifying that the tarball was signed by whoever signed the tarball. So don't do that. Björn Persson pgpuxCuE5BI4x.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signatur ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Wonderful, thank you! This is the sort of pointer I was looking for. I will now
try it.
On Monday, November 22, 2021, 07:05:13 PM CST, Ben Beasley
wrote:
Please compare with
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec,
paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have
gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using
hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead.
That package also uses rpmautospec.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021, at 7:02 PM, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Thank you to Dan Čermák for reviewing this package. However, I had two
> questions from his comments. The first was that the spec file should
> use gpgverify.
> So, I went to the suggested webpage:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_source_file_verification
> and did the following to get my signature
>
> Source0: https://www.x.org/pub/individual/app/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> Source1: %{source0}.sig
>
> but can not tell how to get the gpg keyring from the site.
>
> Second, it is also suggested that I start using rpmautospec, as that
> will make package maintenance simpler in the long run. I like that of
> course, but I am trying to understand where this is used?
>
> Thanks for any advice!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 22, 2021, 04:21:59 PM CST, Globe Trotter via devel
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Anyone willing to review this request for a recently (>8 weeks)
> orphaned package?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138
>
> Happy to review in return.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Please compare with
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xfontsel/blob/rawhide/f/xfontsel.spec,
paying close attention to the comments in the spec file. SKS keyservers have
gone offline since that package obtained its keyring, so try using
hkps://keys.openpgp.org instead.
That package also uses rpmautospec.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021, at 7:02 PM, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Thank you to Dan Čermák for reviewing this package. However, I had two
> questions from his comments. The first was that the spec file should
> use gpgverify.
> So, I went to the suggested webpage:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_source_file_verification
> and did the following to get my signature
>
> Source0: https://www.x.org/pub/individual/app/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> Source1: %{source0}.sig
>
> but can not tell how to get the gpg keyring from the site.
>
> Second, it is also suggested that I start using rpmautospec, as that
> will make package maintenance simpler in the long run. I like that of
> course, but I am trying to understand where this is used?
>
> Thanks for any advice!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 22, 2021, 04:21:59 PM CST, Globe Trotter via devel
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Anyone willing to review this request for a recently (>8 weeks)
> orphaned package?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138
>
> Happy to review in return.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Thank you to Dan Čermák for reviewing this package. However, I had two
questions from his comments. The first was that the spec file should use
gpgverify.
So, I went to the suggested webpage:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_source_file_verification
and did the following to get my signature
Source0: https://www.x.org/pub/individual/app/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
Source1: %{source0}.sig
but can not tell how to get the gpg keyring from the site.
Second, it is also suggested that I start using rpmautospec, as that will make
package maintenance simpler in the long run. I like that of course, but I am
trying to understand where this is used?
Thanks for any advice!
On Monday, November 22, 2021, 04:21:59 PM CST, Globe Trotter via devel
wrote:
Hello,
Anyone willing to review this request for a recently (>8 weeks) orphaned
package?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138
Happy to review in return.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Hello, Anyone willing to review this request for a recently (>8 weeks) orphaned package? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138 Happy to review in return. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Yes, indeed, stupid me. I neglected to post the bugzilla request. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138 Sorry. Best wishes, aa...@fedoraproject.org On Saturday, November 20, 2021, 03:16:50 AM CST, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 04:46:17AM +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Hi, > > As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package oclock. I > find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors and so would > like to maintain it. But first, I need a review. Could someone please help > review the package? This is not how this works. You need to open a normal review request on Bugzilla. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On Sat, 2021-11-20 at 04:46 +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Hi, > > As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package > oclock. I find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors > and so would like to maintain it. But first, I need a review. Could > someone please help review the package? > Hi, Give you some context https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/XorgUtilityDeaggregation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1867220 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1951346 you still have xclock and you can build it on copr ( for example https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/2980373 ) About package review you need do something like [1] you may use fedora-create-review [2] you will need bugzilla api-key [3] . But do you really think we should have oclock package on Fedora ? Best regards, [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1981982 [2] fedora-create-review biglybt.spec biglybt-2.8.0.0-1.fc36.src.rpm --user sergiomb [3] cat ~/.config/fedora-create-review [fedora-create-review] upload_target = fedorapeople.org:public_html/@pkgname@ bugzilla_username = sergio email bugzilla_api_key = > Thanks, > aa...@fedoraproject.org. -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 04:46:17AM +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Hi, > > As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package oclock. I > find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors and so would > like to maintain it. But first, I need a review. Could someone please help > review the package? This is not how this works. You need to open a normal review request on Bugzilla. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)
Hi, As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package oclock. I find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors and so would like to maintain it. But first, I need a review. Could someone please help review the package? Thanks, aa...@fedoraproject.org. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
