On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 12:50, Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 6:03 PM Stephen Smoogen <ssmoogen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 11:49, Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 10:05 AM Mattia Verga via devel
>> <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > Despite 0.16 being available as tag in repository since 2015, libnova
>> > was never updated and it's still 0.15 in Fedora.
>> >
>> > I have notified the package maintainer long ago [1], but I never got a
>> > reply. So I plan to push an update as provenpackager, which will include
>> > a soname bump (from libnova-0.15.so.0 to libnova-0.16.so.0) and rebuild
>> > all dependent packages in a side-tag for Rawhide. The list of affected
>> > packages is:
>>
>> Please don't use provenpackager privileges for this kind of thing.
>> If the maintainer is truly unresponsive, that's what the unresponsive
>> maintainer process is for.
>
>
> If this is not what 'proven packagers' are allowed to do, it might be good to have everyone who has proven packager go through some sort of "retraining" as what Mattia announced doing has been common practice for a long time. It actually seems covered by https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Who_is_allowed_to_modify_which_packages/
>
> If the packager doesn’t keep track of those items, then other experienced packagers are free to fix stuff for them.
>
> I am expecting that this is an area which needs more clarity.
On the page you linked, there's a list of examples of situations when
using PP privileges is appropriate, just below the paragraph you
quoted - security issues, bugs that cause data loss, etc. But "just
update to a new version" is not on the list. That's clear enough in my
It may be 'clear' to you but I don't see it listed as 'This is the limited list of actions that a proven packager may take. Anything outside of that should not be done.' We have given proven packagers a lot of leeway to use their best judgement to make the distribution better for a very long time. I can understand that stronger limits are expected now, but it should be made much clearer.
book ... but sure, documentation can always be improved. For example,
I'm not sure if this page predates the non-responsive maintainer
process (it feels very old), so maybe it just has never been adapted
to its existence.
Fabio
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren-- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
