Bug 2307571

Summary:	Please branch and build in epel10
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Michael J Gruber <mjg>
Component:	gumbo-parser	Assignee:	Troy Dawson <tdawson>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel10	CC:	tdawson
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2024-08-28 15:07:09 UTC	Type:	---
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:	1914423

Description Michael J Gruber 2024-08-23 14:15:45 UTC

Please branch and build in epel10.

gumbo-parser is in epel 9 already, and it is a build requirement of mupdf. A scratch build of the rawhide srpm in koji's epel10 target works as is:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=122355310

Also, it allows to build mupdf in epel 10:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mjg/mupdf-epel/build/7938814/

Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Ralf Corsepius 2024-08-23 15:43:00 UTC

I do not support EPEL and wonder why this BZ is assigned to me, because src.fedoraproject.org lists a "tdawson" as EPEL-maintainer.

Comment 2 Troy Dawson 2024-08-23 20:34:16 UTC

I'm not sure why it was assigned to you.  Thank you for assigning it to me.
I've got it.

Comment 3 Michael J Gruber 2024-08-24 14:36:07 UTC

Thanks for reassigning.

AFAIK EPEL requests are supposed to be filed against rawhide (because the EPEL branch does not exist yet). That's why bz cannot pick-up the EPEL maintainer. Bugs filed against the EPEL package will have the EPEL maintainer as assignee.

Comment 4 Troy Dawson 2024-08-26 13:25:48 UTC

(In reply to Michael J Gruber from comment #3)
> AFAIK EPEL requests are supposed to be filed against rawhide (because the
> EPEL branch does not exist yet). That's why bz cannot pick-up the EPEL
> maintainer. Bugs filed against the EPEL package will have the EPEL
> maintainer as assignee.

Just to let you know, what you said is true if the package doesn't have any epel branches.
But if a package was already in epel, such as this one, then you should file it against Fedora -> Fedora EPEL, and then it should go to the proper person.

Also, here's the build in bodhi
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-2756821284

Comment 5 Troy Dawson 2024-08-28 15:07:09 UTC

This is now in epel10