Bug 1023130 - polarssl package for fedora-epel
Summary: polarssl package for fedora-epel
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: polarssl
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mads Kiilerich
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-10-24 16:59 UTC by Morten Stevens
Modified: 2014-06-09 12:45 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-06-09 12:45:21 UTC
Type: Bug


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Morten Stevens 2013-10-24 16:59:37 UTC
Hi!

There are people around that would like to see some of your Fedora
packages in Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
(EPEL) [1]  -- I for example would like to see polarssl in EPEL and
mainly send you this mail on behalf of the EPEL team as you didn't yet
let the team know via the Contributor Status [2]  page if you are
planning to build some or all of your Fedora packages for EPEL.

Are you interested in maintaining your packages in EPEL? EPEL is similar
to Fedora Extras -- just that EPEL is a add-on repo for RHEL and
compatible spinoffs such as CentOS. EPEL uses the same CVS and the same
build servers as Fedora and a lot of Fedora maintainers are EPEL
maintainers as well; the main difference is just that packages in EPEL
are updated more carefully and supported for a longer timeframe. See [3] 
and [4]  for details. In short: EPEL tries to ship a package once and
update it to later versions only when there is a strong need to.

For branching your packages for EPEL follow the standard Fedora
procedure[5]  -- instead of FC-6 or F-7 targets just use EL-4 or EL-5 as
branch names. If you maintain several packages (> 2) you can also use a
scripted branching method (all packages from a contributor) by using the
scripted branch process[6] .

If you are not interested in EPEL please let the EPEL contributors know
and update the information on [2] to avoid further mails like this --
that just takes a minute or two and would be a great help for the EPEL
team. Please note that EPEL maintainers that might want to see your
package in EPEL will likely start to maintain the package in EPEL sooner
or later and thus become co-maintainers [7] of your packages for EPEL.

The EPEL team appreciate your help with EPEL.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus
[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies
[4] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ
[5] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure
[6] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MichaelStahnke/ScriptedBranchProcess
[7] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/EncourageComaintainership

Comment 1 Robert Scheck 2013-12-02 01:14:46 UTC
I am not sure, if I get you right, but I polarssl-1.3.2-1.el6 is already in
EPEL and polarssl-1.3.2-1.el5 is in EPEL testing (and thus hopefully on the
way to stable repository in some weeks). Is something left?

Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2013-12-02 01:15:29 UTC
Sorry, s/already/meanwhile/g.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.