Bug 1787

Summary:	Branching of unrar for EL-6
Product:	Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Robert Scheck <rpmfusion-bugzilla>
Component:	unrar	Assignee:	Orion Poplawski <orion>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	normal	CC:	konrad, kwizart
Priority:	P5
Version:	6
Hardware:	All
OS:	GNU/Linux
namespace:

Description Robert Scheck 2011-06-04 16:58:04 CEST

I would like to have latest unrar in EL-6. If the package maintainer
doesn't want to (or can't) take care, I would maintain unrar on EL-6.


Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: unrar
New Branches: EL-6
Updated RPMFusion Owners: konradm,robert

Comment 1 Robert Scheck 2011-06-04 17:00:27 CEST

Bah, I think the owners file vs. reality doesn't seem to be in sync, thus my
"Updated RPMFusion Owners" might be wrong. However, I would like to get co-
maintainer if needed.

Comment 2 Conrad Meyer 2011-06-04 17:15:53 CEST

I have no interest in EL-6 -- robert's welcome to it.

Comment 3 Robert Scheck 2011-06-07 19:12:44 CEST

Sorry, the branching was IMHO done the wrong way, it happened on free, while
it should have happened on nonfree. Now there are two empty branches (devel,
EL-6) if I checkout free. But EL-6 is still missing on nonfree tree...

Comment 4 Robert Scheck 2011-06-07 23:41:09 CEST

9647 (unrar): Build on target el-6-rpmfusion_nonfree succeeded.

Comment 5 Robert Scheck 2011-08-02 02:14:16 CEST

If there is no objection, I would like to get co-maintainer on EL-5, too. And
as http://rpmfusion.org/Contributors still lacks a good template, I don't know
what to copy in here...maybe this?


Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: unrar
Updated Branches: EL-5
Updated RPMFusion Owners: CURRENT OWNER(S),robert

Comment 6 Nicolas Chauvet 2011-08-02 22:47:56 CEST

Well,
Please remind that there is an silent ABI break with your EL-6 update.
This sound very unfair if any third part want to rely on our version of libunrar.

I will create an EL-5 branch ASAP.

Comment 7 Nicolas Chauvet 2011-08-27 14:42:22 CEST

There is already an EL-5 branch. And given the previous comment is it really wise to update it there ?

Comment 8 Robert Scheck 2011-09-12 23:52:55 CEST

Nope, you are right, it doesn't make sense for EL-5. Sorry!