Bug 2110208 - Please branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9
Summary: Please branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: numlockx
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert Scheck
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: EPEL9MATE EPEL8MATE
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-07-24 15:17 UTC by Wolfgang Ulbrich
Modified: 2022-08-27 22:00 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: numlockx-1.2-22.el9 numlockx-1.2-22.el8
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-08-27 21:34:01 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Wolfgang Ulbrich 2022-07-24 15:17:51 UTC 
Please branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9.

If you do not wish to maintain numlockx in in epel8 and epel9,
or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner,
I would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package (FAS raveit65);
please add me through https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/numlockx/adduser
Comment 1 GD 2022-07-31 18:19:27 UTC 
Any news on this?
Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2022-08-02 19:51:45 UTC 
Will you be able to branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9? The EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish to build it on epel8 and epel9.
Comment 3 Ben Cotton 2022-08-09 13:22:49 UTC 
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 37 development cycle.
Changing version to 37.
Comment 4 Robert Scheck 2022-08-13 17:39:34 UTC 
Will you be able to branch and build numlockx in epel8 and epel9? The EPEL Packagers SIG would be happy to be a co-maintainer if you do not wish to build it on epel8 and epel9.
Comment 5 Robert Scheck 2022-08-20 11:40:52 UTC 
I've now filed https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10980 according to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-package-request/#epel_packagers_sig_members, because there was no response by the maintainer after nearly four weeks and three attempts (by Wolfgang and myself).
Comment 6 Robert Scheck 2022-08-24 07:43:59 UTC 
Filed https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/46779 and https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/46780 for EPEL 9 and 8 branching.
Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2022-08-25 21:43:38 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f
Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-08-25 21:43:38 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b
Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-08-26 12:54:54 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-08-26 13:03:46 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-08-27 21:34:01 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8d84d3960b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2022-08-27 22:00:11 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-27bb769b9f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.