Bug 627490

Summary:	Prelude OSS version bump request to 4.0.0
Product:	Gentoo Linux	Reporter:	Göktürk Yüksek <gokturk>
Component:	Current packages	Assignee:	Thomas ANDREJAK <thomas.andrejak>
Status:	RESOLVED UPSTREAM
Severity:	normal	CC:	flameeyes, proxy-maint
Priority:	Normal
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	https://www.prelude-siem.org/projects/prelude/files
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---

Description Göktürk Yüksek archtester

2017-08-10 20:37:27 UTC

Prelude OSS 4.0.0 is out

Comment 1 Thomas ANDREJAK 2017-08-10 21:32:53 UTC

Yes, I planned to do it during august

Comment 2 Thomas ANDREJAK 2017-08-31 06:10:32 UTC

https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/5566

Comment 3 Wojciech Myrda 2018-01-24 08:17:11 UTC

Hence the bug is still open than I would use it to inform that on 2017-12-06 version 4.1.0 of prelude has been released. Simple bump of the ebuild and the patch work.

Besides why does /usr/portage/profiles/base/use.mask contain following?

# Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gentoo.org> (18 Aug 2012)
# Prelude is being masked for removal
prelude

Package is still maintained upstream and in Gentoo. Perhaps this information should be removed from that file?

Comment 4 Thomas ANDREJAK 2018-01-26 21:59:12 UTC

I will create a new bug for the bump version

for the /usr/portage/profiles/base/use.mask , what is the procedure to update this ?

Prelude should not be masked for removal since it is now maintain

Comment 5 Göktürk Yüksek archtester

2018-04-04 01:53:42 UTC

(In reply to Thomas ANDREJAK from comment #4)
> I will create a new bug for the bump version
> 
> for the /usr/portage/profiles/base/use.mask , what is the procedure to
> update this ?
> 
> Prelude should not be masked for removal since it is now maintain

Looks like the USE flag 'prelude' is masked. No package supports this flag as-is and it should be removed. It doesn't mask Prelude OSS itself. CC'ing flameeyes to see why he didn't follow through with the removal.

Comment 6 Thomas ANDREJAK 2018-05-22 05:47:53 UTC

@flameeyes : can you answer Göktürk Yüksek ?

Thanks

Comment 7 Göktürk Yüksek archtester

2018-05-22 19:03:15 UTC

(In reply to Thomas ANDREJAK from comment #6)
> @flameeyes : can you answer Göktürk Yüksek ?
> 
> Thanks

15:00 <@gokturk> !seen flameeyes
15:00 <+willikins> gokturk: Flameeyes was last seen 16 days, 3 hours and 41 seconds ago, joining #gentoo-it

In my opinion, it's safe to proceed without explicit approval at this point. Feel free to contact @proxy-maint and ask for their opinion on removing the obsolete mask.

Comment 8 Thomas ANDREJAK 2018-07-18 13:07:37 UTC

(In reply to Göktürk Yüksek from comment #7)
> (In reply to Thomas ANDREJAK from comment #6)
> > @flameeyes : can you answer Göktürk Yüksek ?
> > 
> > Thanks
> 
> 15:00 <@gokturk> !seen flameeyes
> 15:00 <+willikins> gokturk: Flameeyes was last seen 16 days, 3 hours and 41
> seconds ago, joining #gentoo-it
> 
> In my opinion, it's safe to proceed without explicit approval at this point.
> Feel free to contact @proxy-maint and ask for their opinion on removing the
> obsolete mask.

Mail sended on 16/07/2018, waiting for reply of @proxy-maint