On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 6:48 AM Patrick Riehecky <riehecky@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 2023-03-17 at 06:22 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 6:31 PM Patrick Riehecky via epel-devel
> <epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2023-03-16 at 16:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 3:43 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 03:10:23PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is what I have on my ticket. Respond soon (by tomorrow
> > > > > end
> > > > > of day) if
> > > > > you think I need changes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Subject:
> > > > > Notice: <package> will be automatically retired from
> > > > > epel<major>
> > > > > when RHEL
> > > > > <major>.<minor> is released
> > > > >
> > > > > Comment:
> > > > > Thank you for your work maintaining <package> in
> > > > > epel<major>.
> > > > > This package
> > > > > has been considered important enough to Red Hat's customers
> > > > > that
> > > > > Red Hat
> > > > > has decided to promote it to be an official part of RHEL. It
> > > > > will be part
> > > > > of RHEL <major>.<minor>. When that is released, EPEL
> > > > > automation
> > > > > will
> > > > > remove <package> from epel<major>.
> > > >
> > > > That looks pretty good, but I might suggest adding something
> > > > more
> > > > explicit at the end:
> > > >
> > > > Note that this issue is purely informational, you do not need
> > > > to
> > > > take any
> > > > actions at this time.
> > > >
> > > > But perhaps thats overkill. ;)
> > > >
> > > > kevin
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It's slight overkill, but you are correct, they might think they
> > > have
> > > to do something.
> > > I have changed the last sentence to be
> > >
> > > When that is released, EPEL automation will remove <package> from
> > > EPEL <major> and close this bug.
> > >
> > > Troy
> >
> > I'd consider something in a final paragraph that says "something
> > like":
> >
> > No action is required from you at this time.
> >
> >
> > Having an explicit "non-call to action" int its own paragraph may
> > help
> > folks feel more comfortable that they know what to expect and what
> > they
> > do/do not need to do.
> >
> > Pat
> >
>
>
> Although I do agree having something in a separate paragraph would be
> best, my concern is that I don't know how they are creating these
> bugs.
> Doing a single paragraph, everything can fit between a pair of
> quotes, and you don't have to worry about special characters. That
> always works for any scripting or automation you are working with.
> Doing a separate paragraph might be easy, it might be a pain in the
> rear.
>
> Troy
hmmmm, perhaps as sentence #1 then?
Pat
Good idea. I think if we put a modified version of Kevin's as the first sentance, we get.
Subject:
Notice: <package> will be automatically retired from EPEL <major> when RHEL <major>.<minor> is released
Comment:
This issue is purely informational, you do not need to take any action. Thank you for your work maintaining <package> in EPEL <major>. This package has been considered important enough to Red Hat's customers that Red Hat has decided to promote it to be an official part of RHEL. It will be part of RHEL <major>.<minor>. When that is released, EPEL automation will remove <package> from EPEL <major> and close this bug.
_______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
