Hi, On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 01:47:49PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 22/07/15 13:30 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >On 22/07/15 14:08 +0200, David Tardon wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>I've pushed a new version of Boost, 1.58.0, to rawhide and f23, which > >>>will require all packages that depend on Boost to be rebuilt. The plan > >>>was to update to 1.59.0 but that isn't going to be released in time > >>>for the F23 schedule, so I'll update rawhide to 1.59.0 at a later > >>>date. > >>> > >>>For the F23 rebuilds please use the tag f23-boost e.g. > >>> > >>>fedpkg build --target f23-boost > >>> > >>>For the rawhide rebuilds please use the tag f24-boost e.g. > >>> > >>>fedpkg build --target f24-boost > >> > >>Does this mean that maintainers are expected to rebuild their packages > >>themselves? > > > >What's the usual policy? Should I be doing it? (Can I do it, if I > >don't have privs to commit a new %release to the spec file and push > >that?) There is no policy, but usually it is that the maintainer of the rebased package who handles rebuild of depending packages. Especially if the rebuild is done in a side tag. > > > >If I'm supposed to be doing it then I'll get started immediately :-) > > I've learnt from IRC that I would need to be a provenpackager to do it > myself, which I'm not, so either package owners need to rebuild, or if > that doesn't happen in time I'll have to rely on the kindness of a > provenpackager to help out. I can help. But you should really apply for provenpackager yourself, so you do not have to rely on other people the next time. Also, the timing is really unfortunate. The update should have happened before F-23 branch-off, not a week after it :-) Now every package has to be rebuilt twice. D. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
