On 6/20/23 06:44, Ryan Lerch wrote:
> Plans are underway to decommission Nuancier[1]. Nuancier was custom
> built for the single task of voting for Fedora supplementary
> wallpapers, and has not been used for this task since Fedora 32.
>
Had offered to update this. Would it be ok for me to write
Hi,
I was attempting to push a Wine Mono update today but ran into a problem with all
versions of Fedora when building in Koji.
The Wine Mono update successfully compiles on my local system using "fedpkg
mockbuild" for all versions of Fedora.
The builds fail in similar ways but in
Dominik,
On 2023-06-20 05:32, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
Hello!
With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
to the introduction of ffmpeg package and Legal permission to enable
and ship many popular codecs, I think we've reached the critical mass
of
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 18:01 -0400, JT wrote:
> In the original post, I took private to mean its own dedicated list... not
> that it'd be hidden
> from view from everyone. IMHO everything with Fedora should be in the open.
> Bugs should be
> reported upstream, so I dont see why there would need
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 22:36 +, Maxwell G wrote:
> On Mon Jun 19, 2023 at 22:20 +0100, Philip Wyett wrote:
> > On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 21:32 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
> > > to the
Plans are underway to decommission Nuancier[1]. Nuancier was custom
built for the single task of voting for Fedora supplementary
wallpapers, and has not been used for this task since Fedora 32.
As such, Fedora Infra is moving towards decommissioning this
application, and archiving all the data,
On Mon Jun 19, 2023 at 22:20 +0100, Philip Wyett wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 21:32 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
> > to the introduction of ffmpeg package and Legal permission to enable
> >
In the original post, I took private to mean its own dedicated list... not
that it'd be hidden from view from everyone. IMHO everything with Fedora
should be in the open. Bugs should be reported upstream, so I dont see why
there would need to be any confidential information dealt with by the
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 23:39 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Philip Wyett [19/06/2023 22:20] :
> > Private mailing list? No part of this project should have private anything
> > IMHO.
>
> Bug reports can explain security flaws and lead to exploits. They can
> also contain confidentiel
* Philip Wyett [19/06/2023 22:20] :
>
> Private mailing list? No part of this project should have private anything
> IMHO.
Bug reports can explain security flaws and lead to exploits. They can
also contain confidentiel information.
I would suggest a private ml dedicated to bugs and a public one
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 21:32 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Hello!
>
> With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
> to the introduction of ffmpeg package and Legal permission to enable
> and ship many popular codecs, I think we've reached the critical
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 16. 06. 23 17:16, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hi, I have the python-qcengine package, which is not rebuilt by python
3.12 yet.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-qcengine
Hello. This is waiting for:
As the current Maintainer of Fedora Jam... I'm on board with this idea.
~JT
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 3:33 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
domi...@greysector.net> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
> to the introduction of ffmpeg package
Hello!
With the growing number of multimedia packages in Fedora, mostly owing
to the introduction of ffmpeg package and Legal permission to enable
and ship many popular codecs, I think we've reached the critical mass of
packages and maintainers that warrants the creation of a Multimedia SIG.
I
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230618.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230619.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:4
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 48
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 297.96 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216016
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-B-Keywords-1.26-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=102358897
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216016
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1971591
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1971591=edit
Update to 1.26 (#2216016)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2216016
Bug ID: 2216016
Summary: perl-B-Keywords-1.26 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-B-Keywords
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Hey folks! So, as per https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3011 , we plan to
enable gating of Rawhide updates on openQA test results on Wednesday.
What does this mean?
For many updates, nothing at all: only updates on the critical path
will be gated.
For most critical path updates: instead of the
Hey folks! So, as per https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3011 , we plan to
enable gating of Rawhide updates on openQA test results on Wednesday.
What does this mean?
For many updates, nothing at all: only updates on the critical path
will be gated.
For most critical path updates: instead of the
I plan to update python-typeguard from 2.12.3 to 4.0.0[1] in Rawhide.
Version 3 of typeguard included a number of breaking changes[2], and
4.0.0 included a few as well[3].
Directly-dependent package compatibility with version 4.0.0 is as follows:
- python-nptyping is compatible
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215501
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-ad9351039a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ad9351039a
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215501
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-ad9351039a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ad9351039a
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215501
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215981
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Scratch build failed. Details below:
BuilderException: Build failed:
Couldn't upload source
/var/tmp/thn-opszlu98/./SRPMS/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-1.915-1.fc38.src.rpm to
koji.
Traceback:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215981
Bug ID: 2215981
Summary: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-1.915 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215893
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-45536c77fa has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-45536c77fa
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215893
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-db4da4d358 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-db4da4d358
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
||perl-RDF-NS-20230619-1.fc39
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ---
It only adds new prefixes. Suitable for all Fedoras.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215893
Report this comment as SPAM
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Passkey_authentication_centrally_managed_users
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Passkey_authentication_centrally_managed_users
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Passkey_authentication_centrally_managed_users
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215815
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-6eae45b5b9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-6eae45b5b9
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215815
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-6dd1799c92 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-6dd1799c92
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215893
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215815
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On 19-06-2023 12:51, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Sounds like these tools are worth mentioning in the docs, seeing how
many people face the same challenge.
We (I am part of Packit team) plan to do more noise about it later.
Especially this feature - we have finished it in January and asked few
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 13:02:45 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 19. 06. 23 v 11:55 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
>
> >
> > We're discussing a different topic now.
>
>
> Sorry but we don't. The thread started with: "For the 99% of packages I
> maintain I usually perform the same workflow
> when
Dne 19. 06. 23 v 11:55 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 11:22:35 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Right, not pushing to all branches is in line with official guidelines:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases
It's more nuanced than "don't push updates
Dne 19. 06. 23 v 11:30 Sandro napsal(a):
2) Even better is Packit
https://packit.dev/
You have many ways to use it. My favorite way is to use pull-from-upstream
https://packit.dev/posts/pull-from-upstream/
You just make sure you have record in https://release-monitoring.org/ and then
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 08:28:23 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 18/06/2023 17:42, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > I threw all the commands into a script with some optional arguments:
>
> Maybe this script can be added to fedora-packager?
Sure, if folks find it useful enough. In the meantime, I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215893
Bug ID: 2215893
Summary: perl-RDF-NS-20230619 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-RDF-NS
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215815
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
Hi,
Mass rebuild for jpegxl-0.8.1 finished, all packages built successfully
and sent to rawhide:
aom-3.6.0-2.fc39
darktable-4.2.1-4.fc39
ffmpeg-6.0-7.fc39
geeqie-2.0.1-5.fc39
gimp-2.10.34-5.fc39
gthumb-3.12.2-8.fc39
ImageMagick-7.1.1.11-2.fc39
imlib2-1.11.1-2.fc39
jpegxl-0.8.1-2.fc39
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 11:22:35 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Right, not pushing to all branches is in line with official guidelines:
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases
It's more nuanced than "don't push updates to all branches" though:
".. we should
Hello everyone,
Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 19 June
at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on Matrix or IRC (Libera.chat). The meeting
is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can join us
over:
Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#neuro:fedoraproject.org
On 19-06-2023 11:04, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 06. 23 v 11:16 Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
This is quite boring and time wasting... is there a more efficient way
to use my packaging time? Do you think fedpkg can be enhanced to have a
single command which makes 4-5-6 to all specified
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 11:04:16 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> 2) Even better is Packit
>
> https://packit.dev/
>
> You have many ways to use it. My favorite way is to use pull-from-upstream
>
> https://packit.dev/posts/pull-from-upstream/
>
> You just make sure you have record in
Right, not pushing to all branches is in line with official guidelines:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases
Especially I don't like my packages being FTBFS due to other packagers
pushing their updates everywhere. If there was at least included
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 08:46:47 -, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 09:16:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> >
> > So one alternative is *not* to push the change to all branches.
> >
> > Unless it's really necessary, such as fixing an essential bug, I tend
> > to
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 08:46:47AM -, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 09:16:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> > (Also note 'fedpkg clone -B' option to use a separate subdirectory for
> > each branch, much more intuitive IMHO.)
>
> That creates a bunch of unrelated
Dne 18. 06. 23 v 11:16 Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
This is quite boring and time wasting... is there a more efficient way
to use my packaging time? Do you think fedpkg can be enhanced to have a
single command which makes 4-5-6 to all specified branches?
I know several ways:
1) Tito
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 09:16:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
>
> So one alternative is *not* to push the change to all branches.
>
> Unless it's really necessary, such as fixing an essential bug, I tend
> to leave older Fedora branches on a stable release, to reduce churn
Exactly.
On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 09:16:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> For the 99% of packages I maintain I usually perform the same workflow
> when updating them:
>
> 1. Update spec and source in Rawhide
> 2. commit and push
> 3. fedpkg build
> 4. fedpkg switch-branch f*
> 5. git merge
On 19/06/2023 08:36, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
I only need to find how to pass branch names to the alias, instead of
hardcoding them. From a quick search I need to create a function in
.bashrc rather than an alias.
Add to ~/.bashrc:
function fpr {
for i in f$(rpm -E %fedora) f$(($(rpm
Il 19/06/23 08:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto:
> On 18/06/2023 14:51, Sandro wrote:
>> Aren't you missing the 'git push' (or 'fedpkg push')? IIRC, your 'fpb'
>> alias would fail since no changes have been pushed to dist-git for koji
>> to base a build on.
> Good catch. Thanks:
>
> alias
On 18/06/2023 17:42, Ankur Sinha wrote:
I threw all the commands into a script with some optional arguments:
Maybe this script can be added to fedora-packager?
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list --
On 18/06/2023 14:51, Sandro wrote:
Aren't you missing the 'git push' (or 'fedpkg push')? IIRC, your 'fpb'
alias would fail since no changes have been pushed to dist-git for koji
to base a build on.
Good catch. Thanks:
alias fpm="fedpkg switch-branch f38 && git merge rawhide && fedpkg
58 matches
Mail list logo
