Previously, consideration for obsoleting the newly retired package was
only given almost at the end of the Package Retirement Process page,
having both EPEL considerations and unretirement instructions before
that section. Make it more obvious that obsoleting should be considered
every time a package is retired, by changing that to a step within the
main retirement steps.
Also, move the reference to the related, but different process of
renaming or replacing a package to the first, general section, rather
than hiding it within the obsoleting considerations.
This change was motivated by this mailing list thread:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OOFDTAWZE2H7INXNQLW7VIONBKHNAUVZ/
Previously, consideration for obsoleting the newly retired package was
only given almost at the end of the Package Retirement Process page,
having both EPEL considerations and unretirement instructions before
that section. Make it more obvious that obsoleting should be considered
every time a package is retired, by changing that to a step within the
main retirement steps.
Also, move the reference to the related, but different process of
renaming or replacing a package to the first, general section, rather
than hiding it within the obsoleting considerations.
This change was motivated by this mailing list thread:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OOFDTAWZE2H7INXNQLW7VIONBKHNAUVZ/