releng

#12070 fedora-scm-requests should allow branch creation for proven packers
Closed: Can't Fix by patrikp. Opened by zbyszek.

Closed: Can't Fix
Reopen Issue

The general principle is that pp should be able to modify and build all packages. In particular, if a packager forgets to branch for a release, it seems entirely within pp purview to create the branch and build for that release. This is currently denied (https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/61863). Please change the policy to allow.

I'm strongly opposed. ;)

Having provenpackagers drive by, create a branch and drive off into the sunset leaving maintainer(s) to maintain the thing they didn't request seems very poor to me.

if they just forgot, remind them? If you want to actually maintain the thing, get added as a co-maintainer?

But I suppose this is a policy change and could be discussed, that's just my current opinion on it.

I'm strongly opposed as well, for the same reasons.

+1, makes sense, Being the co-maintainer/collaborator for the project should be a basic checklist for this!

Metadata Update from @jnsamyak:
- Issue tagged with: meeting

Hey @zbyszek,

Do you have anything to add to this? We discussed this in our releng weekly call, and we are in opposition to this, while we are open to suggestions, etc, if you would like to bring up this as an alternative. If not we could close this ticket;

Closing this for now. Bring it to FESCo and/or reopen if needed.

Metadata Update from @patrikp:
- Issue close_status updated to: Can't Fix
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

I don't have much to add. I think this creates a hole in pp workflows, but OTOH, I can see the opposing arguments. Since everyone disagrees, I won't push it.
Metadata
None

meeting

None
None
None
Static archive. pagure.io was sunset in 2026; this is a read-only snapshot.
Red Hat Logo

Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat. Learn more about the relationship between Red Hat and Fedora »

© Red Hat, Inc. and others.