On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 23:44 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 17:54 -0500, Carl George wrote: > > > This was approved [0] in today's EPEL Steering Committee meeting. > > > Please continue with the process for incompatible upgrades from > > > step 4 > > > forward [1]. > > > > > > [0] > > > https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/epel/epel.2022-04-13-20.00.html > > > [1] > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/#process_for_incompatible_upgrades > > > > > > -- > > > Carl George > > > > Based on repoquery it looks like only three packages need to be > > rebuilt for this. > > > > converseen > > digikam > > dvdauthor > > Correct the other packages "just" use Imageagick tools , I need to > check > also packages that use perl(ImageMagick) > > I'm going start now ! digikam is updated in epel8-next , I'm doing a side-tag in epel8 . This case brings one question , the packages of epel8-next will be branch to epel8 ? The way I see it is rhel 8.5 + epel 8 and centos stream 8 + epel 8 next , rhel 8.6 is branched from centos stream 8 and epel 8 should also be branched from epel 8 next . This implies that packages on epel 8 must have lower versions than epel 8 next . what I should do with digikam ? -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
