Bug 2043170

Summary:	Please branch and build perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy for EPEL9
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Michel Lind <michel>
Component:	perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy	Assignee:	Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel9	CC:	emmanuel, extras-qa, iarnell, perl-devel
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy-0.16-9.el9	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	2038283	Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-02-14 01:18:20 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:	2031812
Bug Blocks:	2038285

Description Michel Lind 2022-01-20 18:24:06 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2038283 +++

This is a dependency for public-inbox, that I'm trying to package for EPEL8 and 9.

I'm happy to comaintain (FAS: salimma) and be set to be the POC for EPEL bugs. You can also add the epel-packagers-sig group as collaborator on epel* branches.

Thanks!

--- Additional comment from Michel Alexandre Salim on 2022-01-15 15:56:35 PST ---

Will you be able to branch and build perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy in epel8 and epel9?
I would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish
to build it on epel9 (FAS salimma).

--- Additional comment from Emmanuel Seyman on 2022-01-16 01:01:13 PST ---

I've requested an epel8 branch: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/41013

For EPEL9, we still need perl-Plack

--- Additional comment from Michel Alexandre Salim on 2022-01-19 21:59:56 PST ---

(In reply to Emmanuel Seyman from comment #2)
> I've requested an epel8 branch:
> https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/41013
> 
> For EPEL9, we still need perl-Plack

thanks, looks like the branch is processed. Can we just build this for EPEL 8 first? EPEL 9 is less urgent, for my package there are other missing dependencies and those requesting EPEL are still mostly on 8 for the next few months.

Comment 1 Emmanuel Seyman 2022-02-05 14:33:12 UTC

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/41810

Comment 2 Fedora Update System 2022-02-05 23:51:37 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-03ca67dda6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-03ca67dda6

Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2022-02-06 02:36:02 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-03ca67dda6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-03ca67dda6

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2022-02-14 01:18:20 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-03ca67dda6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.