As I see it, you listed reasons why this request shouldn't be denied, but you didn't actually give reasons why it should be granted?

Got requests for backporting sos https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2361785 , https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2361493 after a discussion on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2359696.

sos is released upstream very close to the end of Fedora development cycle, when it's already in final freeze (or even after the new Fedora version is released) and usually it gets new features and bugfixes to collect more details on the new release. It usually ends up that the new sos release gets into rawhide but not backported to the newly released fedora while it will benefit the new stable release more than the rawhide version itself.

+1

If it's new features and bugfixes and no regression... you can actually push it to stable releases without an exception anyway right? Are there cases where there have been minor breakages?

The way I understood the fedora update policy for stable release didn't seem to allow rebases of packages, just backporting of fixes to the released version unless exception is granted. Maybe I got it wrong.

I'd say the policy outlined here is sufficiently vague that this might be a "should not but still ok" situation:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases

Though of course if a new version of sos introduced features specifically targeted at that Fedora release it would make sense (to me) that it would be OK to ship that version as an update on that specific Fedora release :)

FWIW this sosreport discussion thread suggests Red Hat has approved sos to be built and installed during the maintenance lifecycle phases, even when they are not strictly for bug fixes.

If this is not the case for Fedora then Enterprise distributions based on Fedora will likely offer a newer version than Fedora offers at some point. Given the "upstream" nature of Fedora to the Enterprise distribution it would seem quite odd to have something land in CentOS Stream, RHEL, or any recompiled community enterprise distro's, prior to availability in a Fedora repository.

EDIT: Actually, this is the case already. I checked and sos-4.9.1-1 is currently available for both CentOS Stream9 and Stream10.

As Fabio, I'm not opposed to this, but I'm not sure if one is really required.
Generally speaking I'm +1 on this exception.

Also, I do not see any issue if CentOS Stream 9/10 or RHEL have a higher version than Fedora stable. I would be a little concerned if they had a higher version than rawhide.

I don't think there's an exception to grant here? You should be able to just release updates as normal.

Ok, so I guess we can close this ticket and I'll backport accordingly.

OK, so it seems that everybody agrees that the update should be done and that an exception is not required by the policy. So let's close this.

OK, so it seems that everybody agrees that the update should be done and that an exception is not required by the policy. So let's close this.