Name of the package? hash-slinger
FAS username of the new maintainer? pwouters
Branches that you need it to be unretired for? f31, epel8,epel7
Package re-review BZ URL? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675099 (I'm upstream and original maintainer, this package got lost in my emails stream)
Any extra information? I'm upstream and original maintainer, this package got lost in my emails stream. Version 3.0 released today uses python3 so package is ready to be unretired as python3 only
Hi @pwouters did you submit the package for re-review? The BZ link is pointing to the FTBS. It is required to re-review packages retired for more than 8 weeks. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Retired_Package
No I didn=E2=80=99t. It seemed like unneeded red tape in the case of the pa= ckage upstream and maintainer not having changed. Finding a reviewer again = would just delay the accidental retirement, but I guess this message means = we have to do the circus again :(
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 4, 2019, at 05:16, Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1 Hr=C4=8Dka pagure@pagure.io w= rote: =20 =20 humaton added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Hi @pwouters did you submit the package for re-review? The BZ link is pointing to the FTBS. It is required to re-review packages= retired for more than 8 weeks.=20 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers=
`` =20 To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8959
@pwouters Yeah, sorry about that, please reopen the ticket once the review is approved with a link to the review.
Thanks.
Metadata Update from @mohanboddu: - Issue close_status updated to: Get back later - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)