#6241 How to orphan in EPEL only ?
Closed: Will Not/Can Not fix a month ago by kevin. Opened 2 years ago by remi.

Current workflow

  • orphan in pkgdb in EPEL
  • announced in devel ML (package orphan in ...

If someone interested, he can take ownership
Else, the packae is retired

How should we do now ?


Metadata Update from @pingou:
- Issue tagged with: src.fp.o

2 years ago

@ralph @mprahl shouldn't this work by just putting a dead.package in the epel branch?

@kevin, by putting a dead.package file in the epel branch, it would retire the branch. Then if someone picks it up it could then be manually unretired. But as far as orphaning just EPEL and not the rest of the package, there isn't that distinction in Pagure over dist-git since retired packages are determined by if the "orphan" user is the "main admin" of the package (shown in the Pagure over dist-git UI).

@ralph any other ideas?

Since there is no real per-branch status anymore, what about simply announcing it in the README on dist-git and then use the override repo so that bugs reported on bugzilla against epel are assigned to the orphan user.

What do you think?

On 14 September 2017 at 05:34, Pierre-YvesChibon pagure@pagure.io wrote:

pingou added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Since there is no real per-branch status anymore, what about simply announcing it in the README on dist-git and then use the override repo so that bugs reported on bugzilla against epel are assigned to the orphan user.

What do you think?
``

How are those bugs to be closed? I don't want to cause problems with
the upstream bugzilla or people reporting items with large numbers of
unclosed/orphaned bugs.

I wasn't aware that per-branch orphaning wasn't possible anymore...
that seems to making branches for EPEL even harder since people now
need to do extra steps to close a dead stream.

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6241

--
Stephen J Smoogen.

How are those bugs to be closed? I don't want to cause problems with
the upstream bugzilla or people reporting items with large numbers of
unclosed/orphaned bugs.

Well I don't think this changes the current behavior.

since people now need to do extra steps to close a dead stream.

Well before they had to click a button in pkgdb, now they need to assign the EPEL product to orphan in the override repo, announcing it in the README of the repo is entirely optional, imho, it's just to make things more obvious to people consulting the project on pagure/dist-git.

On 15 September 2017 at 04:35, Pierre-YvesChibon pagure@pagure.io wrote:

pingou added a new comment to an issue you are following:

since people now need to do extra steps to close a dead stream.

Well before they had to click a button in pkgdb, now they need to assign =
the EPEL product to orphan in the override repo, announcing it in the READM=
E of the repo is entirely optional, imho, it's just to make things more obv=
ious to people consulting the project on pagure/dist-git.

Most of the people did a fedpkg retire so not even a button press..
Are the items above scriptable to be done in a similar pattern?

--=20
Stephen J Smoogen.

fedpkg retire works just as before, we're speaking about orphaning here, not retiring :)

So, re-reading this that proposal sounds good to me. To recap:

  • To orphan a specific branch, add a PR to https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/pull-requests to make the owner of that branch 'orphan'.
  • If someone wants to take that package, they ask to be added to the package in src.fedoraproject.org and submit a PR to change 'orphan' to themselves.
  • After some time as orphan, the package is set to retired by releng by adding a dead.package file to the branch.

Is there any issue with that? we need to document this, probibly at the upcoming fad?

So, re-reading this that proposal sounds good to me. To recap:

To orphan a specific branch, add a PR to https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/pull-requests to make the owner of that branch 'orphan'.
If someone wants to take that package, they ask to be added to the package in src.fedoraproject.org and submit a PR to change 'orphan' to themselves.
After some time as orphan, the package is set to retired by releng by adding a dead.package file to the branch.

Is there any issue with that? we need to document this, probibly at the upcoming fad?

I'm wondering if we could add a fedpkg orphan command that adds a special file (like dead.package) to mark the branch as orphaned. Then the script that currently listens for commits with dead.package in it could be expanded to do orphan related tasks such as setting the override repo, sending out an email asking for someone to take over the branch, and etc.

I don't remember what the script is called or where it's running but @ralph would remember.

This is pdc-updater (or running on pdc-updater anyhow). Yes, I think that might be nice because then it's all just in fedpkg and people don't need to know or setup anything.

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue priority set to: Next Meeting

2 years ago

Metadata Update from @smooge:
- Issue assigned to kevin

2 years ago

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on Assignee (was: Next Meeting)

2 years ago

I'm inclined to close this ticket now.

Thoughts?

I think I was supposed to document this, but I am really not sure where... closing sounds ok to me.

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue close_status updated to: Will Not/Can Not fix
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

a month ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata