Bug 478633

Summary:	EPEL branch for ruby-gnome2
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Matthias Saou <matthias>
Component:	ruby-gnome2	Assignee:	Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	rawhide	CC:	allisson, mtasaka
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-01-29 19:58:07 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:	463022

Description Matthias Saou 2009-01-02 15:12:37 UTC

I maintain the sshmenu package, which requires ruby-gnome2, and I would like to make it available on EPEL5. Could you please request the EL-5 branch for ruby-gnome2 and rebuild it there? If you're not interested in maintaining the EL branches, just say so, as I wouldn't mind too much having to.

Comment 1 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-07 14:08:56 UTC

Hello, Matthias:

Unfortunately currently ruby-gnome2 is orphaned on all branches (see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/ruby-gnome2 )

Well, I am also a maintainer who has some packages which depends on
ruby-gnome2 (one package _heavily_ depends on ruby-gnome2...), and
as I have already done some commits on Fedora ruby-gnome2, I want
to _co_maintain ruby-gnome2. However I want another primary maintainer
for ruby-gnome2 as I already maintain many packages...

Mattias, would you want to maintain ruby-gnome2? (unfortunately it
seems you have more packages than me...)

Comment 2 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-07 14:11:03 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> Mattias, would you want to maintain ruby-gnome2? (unfortunately it
> seems you have more packages than me...)

Sorry for typo...

Comment 3 Matthias Saou 2009-01-07 15:29:36 UTC

Well, I'd rather not become the maintainer of a package which I nearly don't use, but if there's no other solution, then why not. I would at least first check that upstream is alive and responsive, as otherwise we would be much better off with someone more familiar with ruby than I am.

Comment 4 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-07 15:54:27 UTC

Maybe I would ask for new (primary) maintainer for ruby-gnome2
on fedora-devel-list?

Comment 5 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-09 15:58:23 UTC

Switching to new maintainer.

Itamar, would you like to maintain ruby-gnome2 also on
EPEL? If not, I guess Matthias will maintain this on EPEL.

Comment 6 Itamar Reis Peixoto 2009-01-09 16:13:13 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> Switching to new maintainer.
> 
>I guess Matthias will maintain this on EPEL.

ok, for me is the best option.

is  the time to request cvs for EPEL?

Comment 7 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-09 16:20:19 UTC

I guess Matthias will comment on this bug again.

Comment 8 Matthias Saou 2009-01-09 17:30:53 UTC

I've never done this before (become owner of just some branches), but I think that all is needed is to request the branches to be created in the original review bugzilla entry (that would be bug #232160), but asking to have "thias" be the owner. I'll do that now.

Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-01-29 19:58:07 UTC

Now this bug is closed.