#11153 New Branch "epel9" for "rpms/codespell"
Closed: Fixed with Explanation by kevin. Opened by rishi.

  • Describe the issue

I would like to get the codespell RPM package added to EPEL 9. The current Fedora owner of the package is happy to let me own codespell in EPEL 9, but doesn't want to be burdened with the process of getting it added.

My earlier attempt to request a branch using fedpkg request-branch got automatically closed:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/49299

See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144190

  • When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD)

There's no hard and well-defined deadline.

  • When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD)

When a codespell RPM is available in EPEL 9.

  • If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact?

I wouldn't be able to add a CentOS Stream 9 build to Toolbx's upstream CI:
https://github.com/containers/toolbox/pull/1171


It's possible to add someone as the bugzilla assignee (which is what I did assigning "rishi" to the EPEL branch) when they're not in the package's users list.

I've added "rishi" as an admin for the whole package now, if you want to try the automated way again.

To clarify: Making somebody the bugzilla assignee is not enough. To request the branch, they need access (which the bugzilla assignee override does not provide). One way is to add the user as admin (which will work), and the other is to add them as collaborator for the epel* branches.

Right, admin or collaborator should work. Please re-open if it still hits some problem.

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed with Explanation
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

I've added "rishi" as an admin for the whole package now, if
you want to try the automated way again.

Thanks, Bastien.

Here's another attempt at fedpkg request-branch:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/49451

Metadata