I ran sudo dnf offline-upgrade download with updates-testing enabled in Plasma 6.0.0 in a Fedora 40 KDE Plasma installation. kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 was in the updates. A transaction test error was shown due to conflicts between kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 and kf6-kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 Error: Transaction test error: file /usr/lib64/libKF6UserFeedbackCore.so.6.0.0 from install of kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 conflicts with file from package kf6-kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/lib64/libKF6UserFeedbackWidgets.so.6.0.0 from install of kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 conflicts with file from package kf6-kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/lib64/qt6/qml/org/kde/userfeedback/libKF6UserFeedbackQml.so from install of kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 conflicts with file from package kf6-kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 Reproducible: Didn't try Steps to Reproduce: 1. Boot a Fedora 40 KDE Plasma installation 2. Log in to Plasma 6.0.0 on Wayland 3. Start Konsole 4. sudo dnf offline-upgrade download with updates-testing enabled. kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 must be in the updates. Actual Results: Transaction test error due to conflicts between kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 and kf6-kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc40.x86_64 Expected Results: No errors should have been shown.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kuserfeedback has the upstream link https://invent.kde.org/libraries/kuserfeedback which shows "Project 'libraries/kuserfeedback' was moved to 'frameworks/kuserfeedback'. Please update any links and bookmarks that may still have the old path." So kuserfeedback and kf6-kuserfeedback might be packaging the same thing. kf6-kuserfeedback could obsolete kuserfeedback to fix this problem.
Just ridiculous. No one from KDE SIG group tries to contact me about this situation. And no one checks that they cloned package that I've been maintaining for a while. It's event described in "Package Maintainers" guide: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/New_Package_Process_for_New_Contributors/#check (Check if the package already exists)
I'll wait for instructions what I need to do now.
Update unpushed. But there was warning about Fedora 40 freeze: ``` This update will not be pushed to stable until freeze is lifted from Fedora 40. ```
It is not a clone. We as KDE-SIG packaged the KF6 version of kuserfeedback under the common `kf6-` prefix. Your package should still be maintained as it is the KF5 version of kuserfeedback (back to when it was not a kde "framework"). `repoquery` tells me that `LabPlot` is still using KF5 kuserfeedback, so you should not have tried to upgrade it to KF6 anyways.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kuserfeedback/c/7d3cf191dfd5ecd9353d7d911bf7579225e62c5a?branch=rawhide I even contributed to your package by making sure that it can coexist with the kf6 variant, so obviously we were aware. But I suppose I could have notified you directly.
Thanks. I noticed that the kuserfeedback 6.0.0 change was reverted in rawhide https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kuserfeedback/c/2cf33b99f47b9552ad4b63643385d6726799838e?branch=rawhide Adding an epoch of 1 might be good since otherwise kuserfeedback-6.0.0-1.fc41 might remain in rawhide because it was in the rawhide 20240229.n.0 compose https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-reports@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/GSAY6UTNSABL6QGRCM2ZQJQBMCHTJWZZ/ This problem was described by Adam Williamson at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/NU75E4KDJROIEYOT22N4Y7SBLUXSMXDI/#NU75E4KDJROIEYOT22N4Y7SBLUXSMXDI
It will not remain in rawhide, it would remain installed in people's PC's, but considering the update was not installable, it should not be an issue
I think that rawhide composes include the highest epoch-version-release for a package tagged as f41, so kuserfeedback won't be downgraded to 1.3.0 in future rawhide composes without adding an epoch of 1. Adam's message I mentioned describes the guidelines for this issue.
> I think that rawhide composes include the highest epoch-version-release for a package tagged as f41 We'll find out tomorrow, but i don't believe that is true.
You can see rawhide has `kuserfeedback-0:1.3.0-5.fc41`