On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 9:20 PM Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 3:16 PM Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > I have now submitted > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2150093 and > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2150094 for the > > `nodejs16` and `nodejs18` packages for Fedora. > > > > You can test them with `dnf copr enable sgallagh/nodejs-alternatives`. > > > > The final approach I took is one that follows the example of Python3. > > The SRPM is versioned according to the major release number and the > > output binary RPMs will be `nodejs[-*]` if it is the default version > > for that release or `nodejs$MAJOR[-*]` if not. > > > > I've tested the upgrade path from F36 and F37 and it appears to work > > fine (and could, in fact, trivially be backported to the live releases > > to simplify maintenance). > > > > I'd appreciate package reviews from anyone with the available time. Thank > > you. > > Ping. > > I still need someone to perform these reviews.
Technically, it's not a "need", but a "nice to have", since they're alternative versions of a package that already exists: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_package_review_process (bullet point 2). So unless you really want a second opinion, you could just skip the reviews. Fabio _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
