On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 2:48 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Sandro wrote:
> > I was probably overthinking this. In practice it will turn out to be a
> > new package submission indeed. Moreover, the last remaining active
> > branch of the retired package (F38) is now EOL.
> >
> > I've
Sandro wrote:
> I was probably overthinking this. In practice it will turn out to be a
> new package submission indeed. Moreover, the last remaining active
> branch of the retired package (F38) is now EOL.
>
> I've submitted the review [1] without any Obsoletes.
Since we support upgrades from
On 22-05-2024 12:12, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2024 at 23:51, Sandro wrote:
Hi,
I intend to unretire pyftpdlib [1] and rename the base package to
python-pyftpdlib in line with current Python Packaging Guidelines. The
Why unretire? Why not just do a new package given the new
On Tue, 21 May 2024 at 23:51, Sandro wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I intend to unretire pyftpdlib [1] and rename the base package to
> python-pyftpdlib in line with current Python Packaging Guidelines. The
Why unretire? Why not just do a new package given the new name?
> package has been retired for more
Hi,
I intend to unretire pyftpdlib [1] and rename the base package to
python-pyftpdlib in line with current Python Packaging Guidelines. The
package has been retired for more than eight weeks. So it will require a
re-review.
Since only the base package (SRPM) will be renamed, I'm wondering
