Bug 2393071

Summary: Please build libxml++ for EPEL 10
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla>
Component: libxml++Assignee: blinxen <h-k-81>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: epel-packagers-sig, h-k-81, karlthered
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: libxml++-2.42.3-7.el10_1 Doc Type: ---
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-09-16 14:45:24 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: 2303880, 2393066    

Description Robert Scheck 2025-09-04 08:22:26 UTC
As per https://pagure.io/epel/issue/345, @epel-packagers-sig doesn't exist anymore, so I can not branch and build libxml++ myself.

Could you remove @epel-packagers-sig and add me (FAS: robert) directly instead? Thanks :)

Comment 1 blinxen 2025-09-05 16:36:58 UTC
I requested a epel10 branch and added you as the epel maintainer. I did not build it yet since maybe you want to include the build in a side tag.

Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2025-09-05 17:04:05 UTC
Thank you. It seems like you added me as default "Bugzilla Assignee" for EPEL (perfect!), but permission-wise it's still only @epel-packagers-sig.

See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libxml++ and open the "Members v" drop down menu. Could you please add me at least as collaborator there, too?

As @epel-packagers-sig doesn't exist anymore (was emptied, see link in inital description), you can even remove the group there as well.

Comment 3 Robert Scheck 2025-09-06 13:21:36 UTC
In the end I would like to be able to request e.g. epel10.1 branch (we're at RHEL 10.0 now, RHEL 10.1 upcoming in autumn, but epel10 leads to packages for RHEL 10.2 already) myself.

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2025-09-06 13:22:36 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-3fffff6ae7 (libxml++-2.42.3-7.el10_2) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.2.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-3fffff6ae7

Comment 5 blinxen 2025-09-06 13:43:58 UTC
> See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libxml++ and open the "Members v" drop down menu. Could you please add me at least as collaborator there, too?

Oh, my bad. Added you there too!

Comment 6 Robert Scheck 2025-09-06 13:45:00 UTC
Great, thank you very much! :)

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2025-09-07 00:30:54 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-3fffff6ae7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-3fffff6ae7

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

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2025-09-07 14:53:26 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5963ed8f9e (libxml++-2.42.3-7.el10_1) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.1.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5963ed8f9e

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2025-09-08 01:29:57 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5963ed8f9e has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5963ed8f9e

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

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2025-09-15 00:28:27 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-3fffff6ae7 (libxml++-2.42.3-7.el10_2) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.2 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2025-09-16 14:45:24 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5963ed8f9e (libxml++-2.42.3-7.el10_1) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.