Bug 2110208

Summary:	Please branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Wolfgang Ulbrich <fedora>
Component:	numlockx	Assignee:	Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	adel.gadllah, redhat-bugzilla
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	numlockx-1.2-22.el9 numlockx-1.2-22.el8	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-08-27 21:34:01 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:
Bug Blocks:	2100267, 2101178

Description Wolfgang Ulbrich 2022-07-24 15:17:51 UTC

Please branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9.

If you do not wish to maintain numlockx in in epel8 and epel9,
or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner,
I would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package (FAS raveit65);
please add me through https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/numlockx/adduser

Comment 1 GD 2022-07-31 18:19:27 UTC

Any news on this?

Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2022-08-02 19:51:45 UTC

Will you be able to branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9? The EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish to build it on epel8 and epel9.

Comment 3 Ben Cotton 2022-08-09 13:22:49 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 37 development cycle.
Changing version to 37.

Comment 4 Robert Scheck 2022-08-13 17:39:34 UTC

Will you be able to branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9? The EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish to build it on epel8 and epel9.

Comment 5 Robert Scheck 2022-08-20 11:40:52 UTC

I've now filed https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10980 according to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-package-request/#epel_packagers_sig_members, because there was no response by the maintainer after nearly four weeks and three attempts (by Wolfgang and myself).

Comment 6 Robert Scheck 2022-08-24 07:43:59 UTC

Filed https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/46779 and https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/46780 for EPEL 9 and 8 branching.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2022-08-25 21:43:38 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-08-25 21:43:38 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-08-26 12:54:54 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f

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

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-08-26 13:03:46 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b 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-2022-8d84d3960b

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

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-08-27 21:34:01 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2022-08-27 22:00:11 UTC

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.