The dcmtk package is available for EPEL 8 and a number of Fedora versions.
I ask that it also be built for EPEL 7.
At https://gitlab.com/troelsarvin/dcmtk_epel7.git I have posted code which builds a well-working package for RHEL/CentOS 7. And at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tarvin/dcmtk_EPEL_7/ is a resulting set of packages built using COPR.
(The EPEL 7 version needs to make use of the CharLS package in EPEL 7, and that has caused differences in spec file and patches compared to EPEL 8.)
Would you be up to maintain the package for EPEL 7 (and perhaps 8 too?)
The package is maintained by the NeuroFedora SIG but we're primarily Fedora focussed. We don't use EPEL and so we can't maintain things for EPEL---hard to test etc. If you'd be happy to maintain dcmtk for EPEL, that'll be awesome.
Igor: are you looking after EPEL branches, and would it be OK for Treols to maintain/co-maintain them?
Yes, I'd be happy to maintain it.
But I'm new to the Fedora processes, and I could use a bit of practical guidance. First and foremost: Should the target be to have the same .spec file work for all targets (both EPEL7, EPEL 8, and latest Fedoras)? Or is it OK to have a separate .spec file for EPEL 7? (EPEL 7 has some rather significant library dependencies than all the other targets). If it's OK to have a separate .spec file for EPEL 7, how is that done?
This explains how to go about it:
Each target lives in a different branch on the SCM
There's no compulsion that the same spec must be used for each. If easily doable, some package maintainers prefer to have a single spec with conditionals while others prefer to treat each branch separately.
Are you a package maintainer already Treols? I'll be happy to sponsor you as a co-maintainer for the EPEL branches otherwise:
Cheers, and thanks,
This package has changed maintainer in Fedora. Reassigning to the new maintainer of this component.