From 609c4500e3d917734d45f375e70db3f13e5facc4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Otto Urpelainen Date: Sep 29 2021 18:58:56 +0000 Subject: Update Package Maintainer Docs links Package Maintainer Docs have moved from wiki to docs.fedoraproject.org. Update links to point to the new location. --- diff --git a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/PatchUpstreamStatus.adoc b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/PatchUpstreamStatus.adoc index 825abdd..fa9fc55 100644 --- a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/PatchUpstreamStatus.adoc +++ b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/PatchUpstreamStatus.adoc @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ The above is perfectly acceptable; but if you prefer, a brief comment about what Patch0: gnome-panel-fix-frobnicator.patch .... -Sending patches upstream and adding this comment will help ensure that Fedora is acting as a good FLOSS citizen (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects[Staying close to upstream projects]). It will help others (and even you) down the line in package maintenance by knowing what patches are likely to appear in a new upstream release. +Sending patches upstream and adding this comment will help ensure that Fedora is acting as a good FLOSS citizen (see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Staying_Close_to_Upstream_Projects/[Staying Close to Upstream Projects]). It will help others (and even you) down the line in package maintenance by knowing what patches are likely to appear in a new upstream release. === If upstream doesn't have a bug tracker @@ -44,4 +44,4 @@ Patch0: jna-jni-path.patch == Why upstream? -Refer https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects[Staying close to upstream projects] +Refer https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Staying_Close_to_Upstream_Projects/[Staying Close to Upstream Projects] diff --git a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/Python_Appendix.adoc b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/Python_Appendix.adoc index 3a8a4f8..6184538 100644 --- a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/Python_Appendix.adoc +++ b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/Python_Appendix.adoc @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Our method in building from the same code to make the two separate modules is to Some things to watch out for: * Make sure that you are copying the correct code. The example is copying the code from within the top directory of the untarred source. If the `+%prep+` has changed directory you will need to change back to the tarball location. -* Patching the source code is done before copying to `+python3+`. Since you have both a python2 and a python3 directory you might be tempted to patch each one separately. *Resist!* Upstream for your package has chosen to distribute a single source tree that builds for both python2 and python3. For your patches to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects[get into upstream], you need to write patches that work with both as well. +* Patching the source code is done before copying to `+python3+`. Since you have both a python2 and a python3 directory you might be tempted to patch each one separately. *Resist!* Upstream for your package has chosen to distribute a single source tree that builds for both python2 and python3. For your patches to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Staying_Close_to_Upstream_Projects/[get into upstream], you need to write patches that work with both as well. `+rpmbuild+` resets the directory at the end of each phase, so you don't need to restore the directory at the end of `+%prep+`. diff --git a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/deprecating-packages.adoc b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/deprecating-packages.adoc index d882630..804b66a 100644 --- a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/deprecating-packages.adoc +++ b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/deprecating-packages.adoc @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ = Deprecating Packages :toc: -Sometimes a package is intended to be https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life[removed from Fedora], but it is kept in Fedora for some additional (often indeterminate) time for various reasons including maintaining backwards compatibility. In order to prevent new packages from depending on such a package, it can be marked as *deprecated*. +Sometimes a package is intended to be https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/[removed from Fedora], but it is kept in Fedora for some additional (often indeterminate) time for various reasons including maintaining backwards compatibility. In order to prevent new packages from depending on such a package, it can be marked as *deprecated*. == Prerequisites for deprecation diff --git a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc index 91c1a62..dc0585c 100644 --- a/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc +++ b/guidelines/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ :abi-comparison-tool: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_check_for_ABI_changes_in_a_package[ABI comparison tool] :packaging-committee: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee[Fedora Packaging Committee] :scl-guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/SCL_Guidelines_(draft)[Software Collections] -:updates-policy: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy[Updates Policy] +:updates-policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/[Updates Policy] :toc: macro The Packaging Guidelines are a collection of common issues @@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ as part of the distribution. For documents which cover those issues, please see the following: -* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join[Joining the package collection maintainers] -* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/New_package_process_for_existing_contributors[New package process for existing contributors] +* https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/[Join the Package Maintainers] +* https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/New_Package_Process_for_Existing_Contributors/[New Package Process for Existing Contributors] * https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/creating-rpm-packages/index.html[Creating RPM packages] It is the package reviewer's responsibility to point out specific problems with a package @@ -1921,7 +1921,7 @@ The above is perfectly acceptable; but if you prefer, a brief comment about what Patch0: gnome-panel-fix-frobnicator.patch .... -Sending patches upstream and adding this comment will help ensure that Fedora is acting as a good FLOSS citizen (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/WhyUpstream[Why Upstream?]). It will help others (and even you) down the line in package maintenance by knowing what patches are likely to appear in a new upstream release. +Sending patches upstream and adding this comment will help ensure that Fedora is acting as a good FLOSS citizen (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Staying_Close_to_Upstream_Projects/[Staying Close to Upstream Projects]). It will help others (and even you) down the line in package maintenance by knowing what patches are likely to appear in a new upstream release. ==== If upstream doesn't have a bug tracker @@ -2050,7 +2050,7 @@ There are specific guidelines for handling tmpfiles.d configurations and directo [#renaming-or-replacing-existing-packages] == Renaming/Replacing Existing Packages -NOTE: FESCo has a https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process#Re-review_required[package renaming policy] that should be followed when renaming an existing package. +NOTE: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Renaming_Process/[Package Renaming Process] should be followed when renaming an existing package. In the event that it becomes necessary to rename or replace an existing package, the new package should make the change transparent to end users to the extent applicable.