Bug 2091155

Summary:	Request EPEL9 package - sphinx
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Panos Asproulis <panos.asproulis>
Component:	sphinx	Assignee:	Michal Schorm <mschorm>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel9	CC:	bcotton, hhorak, mschorm, sarroutb
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Branch
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		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:

Description Panos Asproulis 2022-05-27 17:03:43 UTC

Please, branch and build package “sphinx” for EPEL9

Comment 1 Panos Asproulis 2022-06-30 13:12:20 UTC

Any progress on this issue?

Comment 2 Michal Schorm 2022-07-12 09:34:29 UTC

Hello Panos,

The current goal of the Fedora maintainer (me) is to orphan the package as soon as all packages that depend on 'sphinx' drops the dependency.
At this moment, the only such package should be 'mariadb', more precisely a single storage engine.

The 'sphinx' package upstream released two newer major versions and closed the source.

I asked the MariaDB upstream about the vision and the deprecation the above mentioned storage engine is on the table.

I took over the package when the previous maintainer announced intention to orphan the package;
and I announced that I will only do the best effort to keep it building; until I will orphan it.


Introducing the package into EPEL 9 does not sound like a wise intention; unless you want to maintain it in EPEL 9 for the whole RHEL 9 support period (~10 years).


I strongly recommend to find any other way around your request, given the package state in both upstream and downstream.