https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079156
Bug ID: 2079156
Summary: perl-Imager-1.013 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Imager
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:25 PM Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> There is an ancient version of Puppet in EPEL-7. Version 3.6 has been
> EOL for ages now. https://binford2k.com/2016/11/22/puppet-3.x-eol/ has a
> nice EOL overview:
>
> * Puppet 3 - 2016-12-31
> * Puppet 4
I believe it may be time to retire puppet from EPEL 7. The presented
reasons are fair in my opinion.
The el7 users can easily migrate over to higher versions either using the
self-contained package offered by Puppet Labs, or can install the
aforementioned rh-ruby26 and then install puppet >=6 via
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079105
Bug ID: 2079105
Summary: perl-App-cpm-0.997011 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-App-cpm
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 5/161 (aarch64), 4/229 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220424.n.0):
ID: 1242112 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1242112
ID: 1242130 Test: aarch64
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078251
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #7 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078112
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 5:17 PM Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Brian C. Lane wrote:
> > If this fixes the boot issues with the XPS 15 then it's probably worth
> > using this instead of the 'clean' GPT method and then revisit later once
> > BIOS support finally goes away.
>
> (Now i am not sure
Hi,
Brian C. Lane wrote:
> If this fixes the boot issues with the XPS 15 then it's probably worth
> using this instead of the 'clean' GPT method and then revisit later once
> BIOS support finally goes away.
(Now i am not sure whether i shall hope for a significant test result.)
It should be
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 02:49:26PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 2:10 PM Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
wrote:
Hello everyone,
There is an ancient version of Puppet in EPEL-7. Version 3.6 has been
EOL for ages now. https://binford2k.com/2016/11/22/puppet-3.x-eol/ has a
OLD: Fedora-36-20220424.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220425.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
26. huhtikuuta 2022 10.23.23 GMT+03:00 Michal Josef Spacek
kirjoitti:
>Hi all,
>
>We have asterisk FTBFS for long time
>(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1977579)
>And we have asterisk not upgraded for long time.
>We have many of CVEs in bugzilla (mostly fixed in upstream).
>
>I
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 10:43:39AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i uploaded a new GNU xorriso development tarball for the next experiment
> with the Dell XPS 15 L502X of Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski.
I followed your instructions and confirmed that this method still works
with qemu
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 2:10 PM Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> There is an ancient version of Puppet in EPEL-7. Version 3.6 has been
> EOL for ages now. https://binford2k.com/2016/11/22/puppet-3.x-eol/ has a
> nice EOL overview:
>
> * Puppet 3 - 2016-12-31
> * Puppet 4
mspacek commented on the pull-request: `Remove dependency to
Module::Build::Tiny (patched by patch0)` that you are following:
``
@ppisar That's my fault. You removed, but i added back :-D
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon/pull-request/13
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-f4de93ddbc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f4de93ddbc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-5b832c5195 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-5b832c5195
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 8:25 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
> > 4. This is not a policy, but just a guide, an outdated one. Updates
> > policy does not require maintainers to use side tags in this case.
>
> The Updates Policy is not relevant for Rawhide. What is relevant is that
> Rawhide rules
On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 16:02 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> > Do you have any evidence for this claim that the update will break any
> > package? If so, please share it.
>
> You wrote yourself: "The new major version introduces API break and packages
> may need
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
6.63 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/26
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Hello everyone,
There is an ancient version of Puppet in EPEL-7. Version 3.6 has been
EOL for ages now. https://binford2k.com/2016/11/22/puppet-3.x-eol/ has a
nice EOL overview:
* Puppet 3 - 2016-12-31
* Puppet 4 - 2018-10-??
* Puppet 5 - 2021-02-??
Puppet 6 requires a newer Ruby version
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 7:05 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:02:25PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > rust-ab_glyph orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks
> > ago
> > rust-alsa orphan, rust-sig 0
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:02:25PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> rust-ab_glyph orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
> rust-alsa orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
> rust-alsa-sys orphan, rust-sig 0
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Committee on 2022-04-27 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.
A general agenda is the following:
#meetingname
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078251
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078251
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-b0e3cf5aad has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-b0e3cf5aad
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078251
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-d8e9c08b3a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d8e9c08b3a
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078251
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Text-Bidi-2.16-1.fc37
--
You are
Hi there,
with an unchanged spec file, I'm getting some new errors from rpminspect now.
That's why I'm wondering whether something has changed or I've missed a change
to be followed in spec. There are two issues:
Auto-generated library dependencies (f35 f36 f37):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078112
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-7d19fe6bd1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-7d19fe6bd1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
Le mar. 12 avr. 2022 à 10:04, Miro Hrončok a écrit :
>
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 7:38 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 22. 04. 22 19:53, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in
> epel9
> > Koji, but not in mock.
> >
> > At the end, I compared the list of packages with:
> >
> > $ koji
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that
you are following:
``
6.63 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/26
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Fedora Source-git SIG on 2022-04-27 from 14:30:00 to 15:30:00 GMT
At meet.google.com/mic-otnv-kse
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Fedora source-git SIG
Agenda:
https://pagure.io/fedora-source-git/sig/issues?tags=meeting=Open
SIG
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-da0f45d444 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
6.63 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/25
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-libwww-perl-6.63 is|perl-libwww-perl-6.64 is
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that
you are following:
``
6.63 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/25
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078662
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-experimental-0.028-1.f
Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> Do you have any evidence for this claim that the update will break any
> package? If so, please share it.
You wrote yourself: "The new major version introduces API break and packages
may need to be ported to work with the new version." So it has to be assumed
that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-6191f2362e has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
6.63 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/24
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078662
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077027
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 9/231 (x86_64), 19/161 (aarch64)
New failures
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
Adding onto this, as I mentioned an additional step, I can also imagine
defining some macros which would be used in the .spec file. We could
have a simple generic one that would be available within rpm with the
extension possibility of each working group defining their own macros
which they
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that
you are following:
``
6.63 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/24
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078112
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-DateTime-Locale-1.35-1
On 26/04/2022 13.00, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 22. 04. 22 19:53, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in
epel9 Koji, but not in mock.
At the end, I compared the list of packages with:
$ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji
$ mock
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220425.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220426.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 24
Dropped packages:21
Upgraded packages: 72
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 2.78 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On 22. 04. 22 19:53, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in epel9
Koji, but not in mock.
At the end, I compared the list of packages with:
$ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji
$ mock -r centos-stream+epel-9-x86_64 shell --
> Dne 25. 04. 22 v 10:41 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>
> We already have signature of source files as additional source.
Do you mean the 'sources' file?
1) This is dist-git feature, external to RPM, which is quite unfortunate.
2) There are certainly requests to include this into .spec file:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:51 AM Vít Ondruch I also assume that the CI you're talking about already calls spectool
> to download package sources for new versions
I don't think that Koji simple CI nor Zuul does this.
BTW sorry, I just noticed that I have not received ~5 mail from this thread.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078820
Stefan Bluhm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Status|NEW
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 9:49 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-04-22 at 11:35 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 22. 04. 22 9:16, Aurelien Bompard wrote:
> > > Hey folks!
> > >
> > > We're having a look at FMN these days, and we're trying to design its
> > > replacement in our Fedora
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
6.63 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/23
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078820
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078820
Bug ID: 2078820
Summary: Please provide perl-Net-LibIDN for EPEL9
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel9
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Net-LibIDN
Assignee:
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220425.0):
ID: 1240777 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-libwww-perl` that
you are following:
``
6.63 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl/pull-request/23
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:49 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:08 AM David Bold
> wrote:
> >
>
> > I think it does require some changes to CI, otherwise, this will execute
> > untrusted code when all it was supposed to do is download. I do
> > currently assume that I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078560
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:50 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
> On 4/7/22 19:13, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.18
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > Update RPM to the [https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.18.0 4.18] release.
> >
>
> FWIW, this is in rawhide now. Submitted
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:08 AM David Bold wrote:
>
> I think it does require some changes to CI, otherwise, this will execute
> untrusted code when all it was supposed to do is download. I do
> currently assume that I can run `spectool -g` on an untrusted spec to
> look at the source code,
On 4/7/22 19:13, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.18
== Summary ==
Update RPM to the [https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.18.0 4.18] release.
FWIW, this is in rawhide now. Submitted yesterday already but some
bodhi/koji delay caused it to only go live today AFAICS.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078464
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078464
Ralf Corsepius changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|rc040...@freenet.de |mspa...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 1:38 PM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
>
> Il 24/04/22 22:06, Mikolaj Izdebski ha scritto:
> > On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:56 AM Fabio Valentini
> > wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 7:26 PM Mikolaj Izdebski
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 9:32 AM Mattia Verga
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-e7404b9cd7
zchunk-1.2.2-1.el7
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-1e126c870e
stb-0-0.8.20211022gitaf1a5bc.el7
The following builds
Hello!
I'd say we need to move forward with it. Looks good to me.
вт, 26 апр. 2022 г. в 10:07, Michal Josef Spacek :
>
> Hi all,
>
> We have asterisk FTBFS for long time
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1977579)
> And we have asterisk not upgraded for long time.
> We have many of
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-0bb4947962
zchunk-1.2.2-1.el8
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a55cc9e04f
stb-0-0.8.20211022gitaf1a5bc.el8
The following builds
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd x86_64
Iot dvd aarch64
Failed openQA tests: 2/15 (aarch64)
ID: 1240526 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1240526
ID: 1240539 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
Bug ID: 2078705
Summary: perl-Perl-Critic-StricterSubs-0.06 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Perl-Critic-StricterSubs
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Scratch build failed. Details below:
BuilderException: Build started, but failure happened during post build
operations:
Command '['rpmbuild', '-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .',
On 4/25/22 13:42, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:51 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
2) Standalone script does not solve the main issue and that is a way CI could obtain the tarball.
Of course you mentioned "with support for extraction in spectool", but that is also part
of the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077027
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077027
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-dd1c524538 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-dd1c524538
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078112
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|iarn...@gmail.com, |
Hi all,
We have asterisk FTBFS for long time
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1977579)
And we have asterisk not upgraded for long time.
We have many of CVEs in bugzilla (mostly fixed in upstream).
I prepared PR for fix and upgrade of 18 version in rawhide.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-6191f2362e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6191f2362e
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-901d774743 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-901d774743
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-da0f45d444 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-da0f45d444
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
I took mcrcon. Co-maintainers welcome.
Paul.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
89 matches
Mail list logo
