Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-25 Thread Richard Shaw
Updates for f31 and up submitted. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=mumble Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-24 Thread Carl George
Pull request has been rebased and is ready to be merged. Thanks for your help with this Richard. On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:59 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:34 PM Carl George wrote: >> >> I read the policy [0] as "major (bug | security) fixes", and the CVE >> is only rated

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-24 Thread Richard Shaw
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:34 PM Carl George wrote: > I read the policy [0] as "major (bug | security) fixes", and the CVE > is only rated as moderate [1]. Should the policy be read as "(major > bug | any security) fixes"? I am not opposed to building the update > on F31 as well. > > [0] > https

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-24 Thread Carl George
I read the policy [0] as "major (bug | security) fixes", and the CVE is only rated as moderate [1]. Should the policy be read as "(major bug | any security) fixes"? I am not opposed to building the update on F31 as well. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#all-other-up

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-24 Thread Ian McInerney
In your original email you said that this resolves CVE bug [1], which says in it: "NOTE: this issue affects multiple supported versions of Fedora. While only one tracking bug has been filed, please correct all affected versions at the same time. If you need to fix the versions independent of each

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-24 Thread Carl George
F32 is fine by me. Based on the updates policy [0], I don't believe this update qualifies under the "major bug fixes and security fixes" restriction for the previous stable release. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#all-other-updates On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 2:54 PM R

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-23 Thread Richard Shaw
On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 2:42 PM Carl George wrote: > Yes, the patch is from an upstream pull request [0] that has already > been merged to the master branch [1] and is planned to be included in > their next release [2] (it's not part of the current 1.3.2 tag). The > pull request includes a comme

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-23 Thread Carl George
Yes, the patch is from an upstream pull request [0] that has already been merged to the master branch [1] and is planned to be included in their next release [2] (it's not part of the current 1.3.2 tag). The pull request includes a comment linking to said pull request, per the packaging guidelines

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-22 Thread Richard Shaw
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:30 PM Carl George wrote: > Howdy folks, > > This is a non-responsive maintainer check for fedpop, in accordance with > policy [0]. I submitted a pull request for the mumble package last month > that has not been answered [1]. Merging this pull request would resolve > s

Non-responsive maintainer: fedpop

2020-09-22 Thread Carl George
Howdy folks, This is a non-responsive maintainer check for fedpop, in accordance with policy [0]. I submitted a pull request for the mumble package last month that has not been answered [1]. Merging this pull request would resolve several bugs [2][3][4], one of which is for a moderate CVE [4].