Bug 958794 - subcommander: request for reinstatement
Summary: subcommander: request for reinstatement
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-05-02 12:30 UTC by Steve
Modified: 2013-08-30 14:53 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-08-30 14:53:38 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Source RPM from Fedora 15 + new patches (7.03 MB, application/x-rpm)
2013-05-03 01:26 UTC, Steve
no flags Details
2.0-0.9 SRPM (7.03 MB, application/x-rpm)
2013-05-05 14:58 UTC, Steve
no flags Details

Description Steve 2013-05-02 12:30:14 UTC
Description of problem:

The subcommander package appears to have been orphaned by Tigris several years ago. It had a FTBFS status since Fedora 15 and was finally dropped from distribution as of Fedora 18, per bug 843272.

I have patches that address the compile issues and am working my way through the crashing and other bugs present in the software. I would like to see this package reinstated. If there is interest I will attach my current patchset.

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2013-05-02 23:20:32 UTC
If you're going to open a package review ticket, you should include a package to review.  Otherwise there is no point to this ticket.

Comment 2 Steve 2013-05-03 01:26:42 UTC
Created attachment 742964 [details]
Source RPM from Fedora 15 + new patches

Comment 3 Steve 2013-05-05 14:58:46 UTC
Created attachment 743771 [details]
2.0-0.9 SRPM

Includes fix for bug 842371.

Comment 4 Michael Schwendt 2013-06-15 16:32:03 UTC
Steve, I've found only 3 tickets in Fedora bugzilla where your email address appears. It seems you're not a Fedora packager yet, and you haven't mentioned your Fedora account name in this ticket either. As I cannot guess whether you want to join as a package maintainer or whether perhaps you think somebody else would adapt the package, I here only add a few essential links into the Wiki. Please complete the missing steps or close the ticket if you don't want to become its package maintainer. Attaching large src.rpms to this ticket is less than ideal and should be avoided.

* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Deprecated_Package
* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_Maintainers

Comment 5 Christopher Meng 2013-08-09 04:48:29 UTC
NEWS?

Comment 6 Steve 2013-08-30 14:53:38 UTC
When I opened this I was hoping that patches that fixed the FTBFS and major crash issues could be folded in to the previous infrastructure and that there was a switch that could be thrown to turn builds back on. I guess what you're saying is that a new maintainer is needed to do this.

As you might guess by delays in responding this is not something I can take on; with the limited time I have I will focus on generating upstream builds that work. So I guess the NEWS is that we would need someone to step in and adopt this package as a Fedora packager.


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