On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
So this was discussed at today's FESCo meeting[1]. Basically, we're not
sure that it makes sense to have both interpreters in the distribution,
particularly since they are merging back together in the future.
Would
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
If web client had a chance to say hey, i have a /jquery.js in the
cache from application A with checksum 'bla', I can reuse it for
application B, since it request /jquery.js with the same checksum.
Actually just checking
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:18 AM, Stef Walter st...@redhat.com wrote:
I think that as described, this change will cause more harm than good.
As both an upstream and a packager of Cockpit I am against it in its
current form.
Please note that this Change has already been implemented as approved
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
That doesn't really help, since the main advantage to this Change
Proposal is having a single package to update when fixes are needed,
but nearly all web applications take pieces of jQuery out and minify
them (taking
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:56 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
Why are we even bothering with this when io.js is merging back into
node.js so from what I can see is that io.js won't really
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 24.6.2015 v 01:37 Jan Kurik napsal(a):
-- Update v8
What the version of v8 will be? I am asking, since rubygem-therubyracer
is using
On Jun 24, 2015 2:21 PM, Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
On 24 June 2015 at 00:48, Jan Kurik jku...@redhat.com wrote:
While npm 2 is a major version number update, it contains little in the
way of major changes.
Why is this worth more than a sentence or two in the release note
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
Why are we even bothering with this when io.js is merging back into
node.js so from what I can see is that io.js won't really be around
for much longer
That's exactly why we're bothering with it. Everything in it will
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com wrote:
Exactly my thoughts. Plus also introducing another v8 package because of
that?
Having io.js' v8 as well should actually be a good thing for the
distribution. Unlike node.js, which sticks with the same v8 released
with a
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
What the version of v8 will be? I am asking, since rubygem-therubyracer
is using system version of v8 and I am bit afraid what impact it will have.
3.28.73 for nodejs 0.12, 4.2.77.13 for iojs.
Looks like
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
domi...@greysector.net wrote:
On Friday, 19 June 2015 at 01:10, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
# a regular expression that paths in an RPM
# must match to trigger the generator
%__openmpi_path ^%{_prefix}/lib(64)/(openmpi|mpich
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com wrote:
Having had a go at this: if bar{-openmpi} requires foo-{openmpi}, filtering
the provides from foo-openmpi and adding an explicit requires to bar-openmpi
on foo-openmpi, this all will result in bar-openmpi depending both on
On Jun 14, 2015 1:54 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon pin...@pingoured.fr wrote:
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 01:45:53PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
domi...@greysector.net wrote:
Hello,
is there a JavaScript SIG or a mailing list
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
domi...@greysector.net wrote:
Hello,
is there a JavaScript SIG or a mailing list? I've been forced to package
several JavaScript code/libraries and I have some questions.
There is now:
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com wrote:
There are quite a few programs out there, solely made for fetching tarballs,
zips, git snapshots to place those to a location in file system. A different
program for a different target language[...]
...even programs for
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
domi...@greysector.net wrote:
Hello,
is there a JavaScript SIG or a mailing list? I've been forced to package
several JavaScript code/libraries and I have some questions.
However, I couldn't find any trace of a JavaScript SIG or
On May 11, 2015 12:00 PM, ToddAndMargo toddandma...@zoho.com wrote:
Hi All,
Just out of curiosity, is the cut off date for
EPEL 6 support the same as the cut off date for
Red Hat support of EL6?
It is the same as the cut off for RHEL Production support, which is
currently scheduled on
I have just updated libuv in F22 and rawhide to the 1.x series (1.4.0
to be exact) which introduces a proper soname upstream that is bumped
from the previous Fedora package.
libuv currently only has two dependencies in Fedora. One dependent,
moarvm, has already been rebuilt. The other, nodejs,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Dave Johansen davejohan...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to build llvm after applying a patch and I keep getting an error
about lldb-3.4.src.tar.gz not being found, but that file has been there for
previous builds and fedpkg says it has already been uploaded. Any
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com wrote:
I have been assured that %__isa_bits is always defined, except for
noarch builds:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-October/203331.html
That's what this problem looks like to me: something has
Somebody asked me about one of my updates sitting in epel-testing
today, and I noticed that we didn't have a nice page like we do for
Fedora [1] that explains how the testing repository and bodhi, etc.
work to point them to.
So I forked the Fedora documentation and modified it to apply to EPEL
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Zhiwei Zhu z_...@wargaming.net wrote:
I failed in installing monodb on CentOS 7 with following error:
“v8-3.14.5.10-11.el7.x86_64.rpm FAILED
http://yum/epel/7/x86_64/v8-3.14.5.10-11.el7.x86_64.rpm: [Errno 14] HTTP
Error 404 - Not Found0% [
A koji rawhide build [1] just failed with:
INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.39
Start: chroot ['fedpkg', 'sources']
Start: device setup
Finish: device setup
Finish: chroot ['fedpkg', 'sources']
ERROR: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
'/var/lib/mock/f21-build-2179813-398918/root/etc/mtab'
Traceback
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 June 2014 16:46, T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd suggest filing a bug in bugzilla first, explaining the pain this
causes downstream addon repositories like EPEL. For all we know the
-devel
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I was looking to build a package on epel7 that is relying on jansson-devel.
The -devel subpackage is generated as normally from the main jansson
package, but in case of epel7 the resulting rpm is included in
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, so I don't get bit again by bodhi letting me do something I shouldn't...
Do I just unpush the update but NOT delete it?
I have a newpackge update and one of the three packages has a problem so
obviously I don't
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Is it true actually? Last time I was checking the Ruby packages contained
different/modified version of upstream JS files.
AFAICT they're both fine.
rubygem-uglifier includes the main uglify-js via git submodules:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
This is usefully detailed, but it’s not always clear what parts need to be
done by “other developers” (to use the template wording), particularly the
two “will need to be modified” references to Ruby/Java/Node.js .
The known
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Adrian Soliard
asoli...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I really don't understand the situations of the packages
Fedora has a policy prohibiting the inclusion of emulators in the
package collection:
Most emulators (applications which emulate another platform) are not
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Peter MacKinnon pmack...@redhat.com wrote:
Is there circumstances whereby new reviews can be approved without FPC
exception if those assets have not yet been packaged under the new web asset
packaging guidelines and layout?
There's currently a blanket exception
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
Rails depends on exact v8
version, which means v8 3.14 must have also their own SCL as part of the SCL.
Stupid question: what in rails depends on v8 exactly?
The only thing that Requires v8 in Fedora besides nodejs and
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Reposting from http://fedoramagazine.org/?p=1231, for those of you who
prefer email to the web. :)
Perhaps these should be syndicated to Planet Fedora, for those of us
who don't mind the web? Actually, I swear I've
Something seems to be wrong with 'fedpkg new-sources' here. :-(
% fedpkg new-sources libuv-v0.10.25.tar.gz
Uploading: 329a61fa3c30acf46efef1a9221b2054 libuv-v0.10.25.tar.gz
Could not execute new_sources: Lookaside failure: (60, Peer's
certificate issuer has been marked as not trusted by the
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
I've seen this a few times and it was something wacky in ~/.pki/
can you try a 'mv ~/.pki ~/.pki.sav' and see if it works?
That did the trick. Thanks for the _very_ quick help. :-)
-T.C.
--
devel mailing list
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote:
This has happened twice now. I run 'yum upgrade' and, all of a
sudden, /var/run/nologin exists. It contains a message telling me
that my system is still booting. This is, of course, a lie -- the
system has been up for
Sorry, left the list out when I sent this before. Here it is for
everyone, with updates...
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:59 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, I kind of dropped the ball on this. :-(
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com wrote:
Notice: the current httpd.conf in git is broken because for alias order
which need to be fixed.
Yeah I believe there are still a couple of things you mentioned in our
conversation in August that still need to be
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com wrote:
python-webm-0.2.2-2.fc20.src.rpm
Fixed in python-webm-0.2.2-5.fc21
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=487623
Thanks,
-T.C.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Sorry, but that is not accidental comment.
First of all, we are working with git. I have local clone of git repository
and I am free to commit whatever I consider to be committed. And I assume
that you know that you can
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:10:08AM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
I do commit locally
although I probably don't want push the snapshot sources, because I update
them later, when time comes.
+1
The more I think about
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
It would be nice also to check that the sources file contains the
Sources listed in the spec file, since I often bump the version number
and forget to upload the new sources.
Yeah. I actually have a little shell
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz
mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote:
Does it handle %autosetup use as well?
Now it does. :-)
-T.C.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Martin Stransky stran...@redhat.com wrote:
There are some cases when we need it (sources taken as a snapshot from
git/cvs)
Huh? The sources have to be either in git or in the lookaside cache
for koji to find them later. I'm not sure how it could get this
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Mathieu Bridon
boche...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
The kernel package uses a custom-defined ApplyPatch macro, for example.
It still uses %{patches} though, so it would pass.
-T.C.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Martin Stransky stran...@redhat.com wrote:
I mean the upstream source check. It may not work if you use generated
source files [1].
No way am I doing an upstream source check in a git pre-commit hook!
I'm not waiting for v8 to be downloaded and hashed every time
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
It prevents even local commits if I am not wrong.
Yeah, to only do it when commits are pushed would mean to do it as a
pre-receive hook on the dist-git server, which makes things
significantly more complicated.
Plus
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:42 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
To prevent this from happening in the future, I wrote a little git
pre-commit hook to help out, which I figured I'd share with you all:
http
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 18:36:48 -0700
T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
Any chance an automatic build could be tacked on the end of that?
Seems like it would be pretty easy to add to your wiki script and
would
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
I wouldn't think so no. I would say all epel7 packages MUST use
systemd units. I don't know the state of the systemd rpm macros in
rhel7, we would need to figure that out. Hopefully they are all there.
+1000 from me. Won't be
Invariably when adding a patch to a spec, often I forget some detail,
whether it be adding the %patchN macro to %prep or `git add`ing the
patch. It would seem I'm not alone, either. A Google search for e.g.
site:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/scm-commits/ really
apply patch returns
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
Several folks have been asking about epel7 and we should get the ball
rolling now that there is a public rhel7 beta.
I'd like to propose a similar plan to the one we used for epel6, which
the possible exception of branching
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Petr Vobornik pvobo...@redhat.com wrote:
This solution is much nicer and can be used by other font packages as well.
Here's the new package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036754
Very awesome, thanks! I'll sponsor you and review. :-)
Luckily, I
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon pin...@pingoured.fr wrote:
- The idea of owner of a package disapear. There are only maintainers on
which
one of them appears to be the dedicated point of contact for this package
(ie:
the person that gets the bugs in bugzilla).
Koji also
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us wrote:
Not at all true. Any one can tag a build into an unlocked tag such as
f20-updates-candidate tags such as f20-updates-testing are protected
and can only be tagged into by an admin in koji. Koji has no concept of
acls, It
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I just noticed that my rawhide installation, which was originally installed
when F18 was rawhide in summer 2012 and upgraded since, has
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 6:03 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
Please shout if you need it for anything and would like to take it over,
otherwise I'll retire it in a week or so.
Nobody even so much as whispered, except to say not me either!, so libeio is
now retired.
-T.C
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
This has the downside that it'll add the dependency on gnupg,
which is not great. Maybe simply create a keyrings-filesystem
package with this directory and have whoever installs keyrings
depend on it.
If
What a mess! I sure do seem to be attracted to bundled library issues, like
insects are attracted to shiny lights. :-(
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013 18:03:48 -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
I adopted libeio back when Node.js
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org wrote:
I'd be quite happy if someone would take perl-IO-AIO off my hands. My only
interest in it is as an (optional) backend and test dependency of
perl-AnyEvent, which I co-maintain - I picked it up when a previous
maintainer
I adopted libeio back when Node.js still bundled it to aid in the unbundling
effort, but upstream fixed the bundling problem here by no longer using
libeio for anything.
It's now conflicting with a different eio, used by Enlightenment. Since most
other distros ship the Enlightenment version as
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
Where's the code? The github link seems to be broken.
Sorry for the delay on that. The code is now here:
https://github.com/tchollingsworth/ttname
And it's already in Rawhide, F20, and F18-19 updates-testing.
See the
Thanks for tackling this!
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
So, tinymce has a 'media' plugin which lets you embed media in HTML
you're editing with it. If it thinks the media might need playing with
Flash, it'll generate HTML that tries to use a Flash
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
All the upstream projects I found seemed to consider jumping to tinymce
4 a rather large move. Debian packages 3 and 4 as separate packages. I
rather think we should do the same rather than just pretend they're the
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Just to cover my ass, this kind of symlinking is explicitly allowed by
the draft new JavaScript policy:
Regardless, web applications may want to make subdirectories of
%{_jsdir} available under their own directory via
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 06:36 -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Any chance you could just use an Alias in the apache config? Then you can
just
delete the directory and not muck around with making yum happy.
Doesn't
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org wrote:
So what we found on irc :
Since rpm first create the files for the new rpm that is installed, then
remove the files that should be removed still present from old rpm and
not in the new one, we fix the issue by waiting until
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
And, T.C., we probably need the Web Assets policy to set some
rules/guidelines on how best to achieve unbundling: should we always try
to patch the upstream to find the 'official' location of the shared
resource on
Hi!
Would someone be willing to trade me a review for:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997678
It's dead simple at the moment: it just provides a couple directories and RPM
macros. Later on it will grow some httpd magic but that's on hold until Fedora
21 since we're still sorting
On 8/23/13, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 17:12 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
One further thought here:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:JavaScript#Static_Inclusion_of_Libraries
Taking a static library approach is also allowed. This can
On 8/23/13, T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
It's for case #2 that the exception got expanded to be allowed for
webapp packages, but it's really not intended to just permit bundling
to continue when you can just as easily unbundle. I'll look at
tightening
Bah
On 8/22/13, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Looked into this a bit further this afternoon. Both swfupload and
plupload are open source projects, but Wordpress ships compiled binaries
in its 'source tarball', there is no build system in there for them at
all. Wordpress posts the
On 8/15/13, T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
It's come to my attention that a number of packages contain Flash (.swf)
files,
but absolutely none of them have BuildRequires on a free software Flash
toolchain, nor do any of them seem to be shipping the source for these
files
It's come to my attention that a number of packages contain Flash (.swf) files,
but absolutely none of them have BuildRequires on a free software Flash
toolchain, nor do any of them seem to be shipping the source for these files.
:-(
It has never been permissible to included prebuilt files of
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com wrote:
I just fixed these and gallery3, no need to file BZs, unless you'd like to
for tracking. Additional testers welcome!
Nah, I'll rerun the query in the script that files BZs later on.
Although if one of you ends up
It's come to my attention that a number of packages contain Flash (.swf) files,
but absolutely none of them have BuildRequires on a free software Flash
toolchain, nor do any of them seem to be shipping the source for these files.
:-(
It has never been permissible to included prebuilt files of
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
Thanks. Turns out ckeditor also had a raw .fla file. I don't know if any
package would have a .fla without a .swf, but it might be worth checking
for.
Thanks for pointing that out!
.fla files are source files, so
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com wrote:
Forgive me if I sound rude and correct me if I'm wrong, but arent the
free versions of Flash pretty useless as well?
We're talking about SWF compilers here, not players. There are free
compiler tools that work just fine
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:23 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
Debian already uses /usr/share/javascript for this purpose, and it
would be really nice if we both could coordinate on getting some
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Robert Marcano
rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
This is a better explanation of why the use /usr/share/javascript: We want
to be compatible with others distribution that have the legacy idea that
JavaScript is a browser only thing, so in this directory we will
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Robert Marcano
rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
On 08/12/2013 03:23 PM, Robert Marcano wrote:
This is a better explanation of why the use /usr/share/javascript: We
want to be compatible with others distribution that have the legacy idea
that JavaScript is a
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Robert Marcano
rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
And I don't see a problems with those examples, because they share only
their contents, by installing them you don't share content from other
packages.
Lets make an example of the mess this will create if I want
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Robert Marcano
rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
The directory is not called /usr/share/web-javascript, it is called
/usr/share/javascript, and the packaging guidelines draft explicitly says
that the intention is to avoid duplication of libraries, so it is calling
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/05/2013 04:25 PM, alexus wrote:
I can't update these packages... either I'm doing something wrong
or perhaps package is broken?
..
Error unpacking rpm package npm-1.3.3-1.el6.noarch error: unpacking
of
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:25 PM, alexus ale...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't update these packages... either I'm doing something wrong or perhaps
package is broken?
Definitely the latter. :-)
snip
--- Package libmodplug.x86_64 0:0.8.7-1.el6.rf will be updated
This package is from RPMforge not
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Petr Vobornik pvobo...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
Many web apps use an optimization technique where they try to minimize the
number of httpd request by concatenating minified versions into one file.
Example: app uses 20 tiny jQuery plugins.
Similar use case is
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
Do you know there are GNOME JavaScript applications? And that JavaScript is
being encouraged as a language for desktop applications? So all those
libraries that can be used on desktop and web clients will be shared
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
Please provide actual recommendations about how to run the ttname
command to the guidelines before filing bugs. And get the guideline
approved to avoid unnecessary changes. Also this does not seem to be
really a MUST
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
If you are going to file a bunch of bugs, PLEASE see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_bug_filing
I definitely will follow that, thanks!
You might want to shout about that a little more widely, I think every
mass bug filing
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
The guideline should be to ask upstream to fix the meta data. In case of
missing license text (e.g. source code with a GPL header but no copy of
the GPL itself), it is also upstream's task to fix it and the packager's
to ask
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:48 AM, Robert Marcano
rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote:
On 07/26/2013 12:30 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Lun 22 juillet 2013 21:58, Robert Marcano a écrit :
The real problem with publishing things is that if I distribute binaries
of many things I must follow the
npm, the Node.js package manager, has changed license [1] from a
modified version of the MIT [2] to the Artistic 2.0 [3] license
effective with version 1.3.6. This version is now in Rawhide and
queued for updates-testing in Fedora 19 and 18 as well as EPEL 6.
Fedora Legal believes both licenses
On Jul 29, 2013 8:31 PM, Wei, Gang gang@intel.com wrote:
Thanks for the answer, it makes sense to me.
No problem. :-)
I forgot to mention that the flip side of this is that those are also the
only channels that EPEL is forbidden to conflict with. You're free to
package the dependencies you
On 7/26/13, Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com wrote:
'examples' directory contains arch dependent programs, I can't
packaging them in /usr/share.
In that case you could consider shipping them in an -examples
subpackage if most consumers of the main package won't find them
useful. Also, you
Hi!
On Jul 24, 2013 9:04 AM, Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm editing .spec file of MUMPS package to conform it to the MPI
packaging guidelines (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MPI). I
have a modest experience in this particular case so I need some
suggestions.
This
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
So, this change has FPC guidelines and also some redhat-rpm-macros
changes?
Yup, we just need to add a macro so it's available during
createSRPMfromSCM in Koji. (The conditionalized syntax we'd need
otherwise is just awful.)
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Nicolas Mailhot
nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
Le Lun 22 juillet 2013 17:07, Robert Marcano a écrit :
Fonts has licenses, some of them require the license to be shown or the
copyright displayed, some fonts has the copyright added to their
metadata, I don't
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Nicolas Mailhot
nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
Historically it was quite widespread. The only bit of font metadata one
could rely on was the font name, and then not always. A font author would
widely announce the relicensing of his font and not change the
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:45 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth
tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote:
There are additionally 252 fonts in 128 packages that don't set the
license description field while setting the copyright field. [2]
These are probably fine, but we might want to take a look over them
anyway
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
Can we please use a different name, like webdata? The term asset seems
to scare some people.
Huh? It's a pretty common industry term for static bits used as
dependencies for websites. I've never heard of anyone being scared
of
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Björn Persson
bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
Florian Weimer wrote:
On 07/16/2013 12:54 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Web Assets =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Web_Assets
Can we please use a different name, like
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
