i like vim , I'll take it.
2009/10/7 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com
On 10/06/2009 03:41 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
Matej Cepl, Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:26:09 +:
However, for personal reasons I
need to decrease my personal involvment in non-work related Fedora work.
I have still on my
Matej Cepl, Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:26:09 +:
However, for personal reasons I
need to decrease my personal involvment in non-work related Fedora work.
I have still on my list:
* cycle -- Calendar program for women (any ladies would like to decrease
gender gap in Fedora packaging? Or would
On 10/06/2009 11:41 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
Matej Cepl, Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:26:09 +:
However, for personal reasons I
need to decrease my personal involvment in non-work related Fedora work.
I have still on my list:
* vim-vimoutliner -- Script for building an outline editor on top of Vim
On 10/02/2009 04:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
A important oddness of the feature process is that it is not actually
necessary for the feature to be in the distribution. So you send a nag
mail, feature owners ignores it, you drop the feature and the
functionality is still there. So unless the
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 19:00:12 +0200,
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
So really, I see no practical argument against switching back to the
Alpha/Beta/Preview naming (and reintroducing the old Alpha – again, as
useless as it was in practice, the psychological impact on
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I'll take this one.
Peter
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Am Samstag, den 03.10.2009, 10:09 +0100 schrieb Peter Robinson:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I'll take this one.
Peter
I've just commented on that package, but you're not yet maintaining it,
so I'll repeat what I've discussed with Matěj already:
1. There is some bug with
2009/10/3 Christoph Höger choe...@cs.tu-berlin.de:
Am Samstag, den 03.10.2009, 10:09 +0100 schrieb Peter Robinson:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I'll take this one.
Peter
I've just commented on that package, but you're not yet maintaining it,
so I'll repeat what I've
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On 10/02/2009 04:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
So do we need to fix this? I think recognizing that there's different
types of features and some of them can continue even if they are dropped
while others must be (wholly or partially) reverted if
On 10/02/2009 09:19 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- Wait until we have the list of approved features.
- Divide them up amoung fesco and have a 'point contact' for each that
is a fesco member.
Having a FESCo owner to every feature in addition to the feature owner
might help. Abrt was part of
Christoph Wickert, Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:58:58 +0200:
I'm going to take over nimbus. I already reviewed it and you asked me
for co-maintenance. Sorry I didn't find the time to look into the EPEL
build error sooner, it's still on my todo list.
Ownership released. Concernig bug
Dominic Hopf, Sat, 03 Oct 2009 01:46:04 +0200:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I would like to maintain this package then.
Talk with Peter Robinson about comaintainership.
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
Dominic Hopf, Sat, 03 Oct 2009 01:46:04 +0200:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I would like to maintain this package then.
Talk with Peter Robinson about comaintainership.
I'll quite happily have someone to help
Christoph Höger, Sat, 03 Oct 2009 14:23:01 +0200:
2. The sync-ui binary (which I wanted to test the most ;)) is missing.
It is not missing in devel (now F-12) package. But it is still not
working correctly due to %{_libdir}/syncevolution packages.
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
Peter Robinson, Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:09:20 +0100:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I'll take this one.
Released in pkgdb. Thanks.
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Am Samstag, den 03.10.2009, 19:42 +0100 schrieb Peter Robinson:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
Dominic Hopf, Sat, 03 Oct 2009 01:46:04 +0200:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I would like to maintain this package then.
Talk with Peter
Jesse Keating, Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:39:16 -0700:
We've stopped caring about anything outside of the critical path.
Thanks for clarifying it. At least I know now that I should give up on
maintaining Fedora packages because nobody cares about them. Will do next
week.
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list
Dne Fri, 2 Oct 2009 06:08:16 + (UTC) Matej Cepl napsal(a):
Jesse Keating, Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:39:16 -0700:
We've stopped caring about anything outside of the critical path.
Thanks for clarifying it. At least I know now that I should give up
on maintaining Fedora packages because nobody
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Matej Cepl wrote:
Jesse Keating, Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:39:16 -0700:
We've stopped caring about anything outside of the critical path.
Thanks for clarifying it. At least I know now that I should give up on
maintaining Fedora packages because nobody cares about them. Will
(intentionally breaking the thread so this is not burried somewhere in
depths)
Michal Schmidt, Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:15:30 +0200:
You're misinterpreting Jesse's quote out of context.
I am misunderstanding them (in case your interpretation is more correct).
So that's just that rel-eng doesn't
On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:35:33 -0700
John Poelstra poels...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
and
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 15:26 +, Matej Cepl wrote:
I am misunderstanding them (in case your interpretation is more correct).
So that's just that rel-eng doesn't have enough work to do (otherwise,
why they do not control only critical path components?).
Releng and QA are very small
2009/10/2 Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com:
pspp -- A program for statistical analysis of sampled data
I can take care of if.
jbrout -- Photo manager, written in python/pygtk
pyexiv2 -- Python binding to exiv2 (used by jbrout)
I'm using it, so I'll take care of it..
--
With best regards, Peter
Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com writes:
Releng and QA are very small groups. The Fedora package set is
extremely large. Over 8K packages. The rate of change is far too grate
to provide second guessing over every package.
That's why I am surprised you want to click through all those
Am Freitag, den 02.10.2009, 15:26 + schrieb Matej Cepl:
I also wish to orphan these packages, and frankly I care about them much
less, so if nobody steps up, I will probably just let them die.
JSDoc -- Produces javadoc-style documentation from JavaScript sourcefiles
nimbus -- Desktop
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 17:37:18 +,
Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com writes:
Releng and QA are very small groups. The Fedora package set is
extremely large. Over 8K packages. The rate of change is far too grate
to provide second guessing over
- Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
Bugs can include RFEs as well as actual brokeness. I don't think that
really buys you anything. And a bad maintainer could just file an RFE for an
upgrade and refer to that bug when they provide the upgrade.
Yes, of course, but I expect Fedora
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
Bugs can include RFEs as well as actual brokeness. I don't think that
really buys you anything. And a bad maintainer could just file an RFE for an
upgrade and refer to that bug when
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 17:37 +, Matěj Cepl wrote:
That's why I am surprised you want to click through all those requests for
fixes
in non-essential packages. Why not leave them open (or allow updates only when
bug number is attached)?
Because we don't have the infrastructure to handle
Am Freitag, den 02.10.2009, 15:26 + schrieb Matej Cepl:
syncevolution -- SyncML client for evolution
I would like to maintain this package then.
Regards,
Dominic
--
Dominic Hopf dma...@gmail.com
http://dominichopf.de/
Key Fingerprint:
A7DF C4FC 07AE 4DDC 5CA0 BD93 AAB0 6019 CA7D 868D
Kevin Fenzi said the following on 10/02/2009 08:49 AM Pacific Time:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:35:33 -0700
John Poelstra poels...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
On 10/03/2009 05:20 AM, John Poelstra wrote:
Sounds great to me, but would other members go for it? :) Maybe this is
along the lines of the Features SIG that someone suggested a ways back.
A important oddness of the feature process is that it is not actually
necessary for the feature to be
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 14:51:15 -0400,
Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
Bugs can include RFEs as well as actual brokeness. I don't think that
really buys you anything. And a bad maintainer could just file an RFE for an
upgrade and refer to
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug Fixes
ONLY, we are getting to acks (Red Hat people know
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:34:38AM +, Matej Cepl wrote:
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug
On 10/01/2009 05:34 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug Fixes
ONLY,
On Oct 1, 2009, at 2:28, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-06-12/fedora-
meeting.2009-06-12-17.01.html
Ah, there it is, I must have missed it when going through the
summaries,
sorry. :-(
So I'll have to
Matej Cepl wrote:
Well, RHEL commits (hopefully I am not leaking some NDA-covered
information ;)) have to have something like fixes #123435 in the commit
message. We could do the same easily but requesting that updates in bodhi
have to be just bugfixes.
I can make a bug out of almost
Kevin Kofler said the following on 10/01/2009 02:28 AM Pacific Time:
So I'll have to blame the previous FESCo for voting this through with
practically no feedback, as they observed themselves before the vote:
17:14:04 nirik has there been any feedback on lists or wiki?
17:14:15 * nirik just
John Poelstra wrote:
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
and our ability to release on time. As the group responsible for
guiding
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:53:21AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Poelstra wrote:
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
and our
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
How about starting now? Our last two meetings took about 20 min combined.
We're through the Feature process mostly, and we're entering the part of the
development cycle that people need help with, reminders for, planning,
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 18:21 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
One thing I think is unclear this cycle is the usage of the word Beta.
It's been said many times that beta is not really beta but actually
final freeze. For instance: If all goes as planned the Beta
(previously known as Final
Jesse Keating, Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:45:08 -0700:
Right, I've always taken it to mean Our experimental code is in, and
we're ready to take end user testing feedback on it which is different
from our code is in, but not really done, and we don't care if it's
broken because we're going to
And Today I am %100 finished... Please point out which part of that
did I misinterpret, because the last thing I want to do is cause problems...
Because we do seem to fight this problem every release. Was anyone else
confused about when the deadline was? It seems very clear to me, on
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 10:10 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with installer, installing from NFS shares from older
servers, say RHEL5. How will anaconda handle mounting? Will there be
odd errors
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 05:33:15PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
* Firewall Friendly- With v4 only one port is used 2049 for all traffic
including mounting and file locking.
Amen to that!
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
libguestfs
On 09/30/2009 04:53 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 10:10 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with installer, installing from NFS shares from older
servers, say RHEL5. How will anaconda
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/30/2009 04:53 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 10:10 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with installer, installing from NFS shares from older
servers, say
On 09/30/2009 06:18 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/30/2009 04:53 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 10:10 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with installer,
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/30/2009 06:18 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/30/2009 04:53 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 10:10 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with
Steve,
just for clarity what you are actually saying is that.
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:45 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 09:42 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com said:
On the server (Which is suggested):
* Add the following entry to the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:04PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Examples of what to do and not do from this point forward:
Do: Have something testable
Do: Have the the feature significantly complete
Do: submit bugfixes
Do not: Enable the feature by default
Do not: Make changes that cause
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 08:36:54AM +, Matej Cepl wrote:
Jesse Keating, Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:45:08 -0700:
Right, I've always taken it to mean Our experimental code is in, and
we're ready to take end user testing feedback on it which is different
from our code is in, but not really done, and
On 09/30/2009 07:22 AM, Howard Wilkinson wrote:
Steve,
just for clarity what you are actually saying is that.
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:45 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 09:42 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com said:
On the server (Which is
On 09/30/2009 07:05 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
I can't see how it would cause a mount storm: all you'd be doing is
issuing a mount request twice, once in each protocol.
Times 1000 very 5 seconds...
So 2000 every 5 seconds as opposed to 1000 every 5 seconds. This is
surely better than
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com said:
On the server (Which is suggested):
* Add the following entry to the /etc/exports file:
/ *(ro,fsid=0) Note: 'fsid=0' is explained in the exports(5) man pages.
Mike McGrath wrote:
Because we do seem to fight this problem every release. Was anyone else
confused about when the deadline was? It seems very clear to me, on
several occasions, when features needed to be in by.
This release cycle had an additional source of confusion because what used
to
Steve Dickson wrote:
I my past, added things of this size in a beta release was actually
common.. In alpha release you get the software married to the hardware
(i.e. barely booting) and in beta release you added everything else...
Yes, but that Alpha doesn't exist anymore and what was called
Matej Cepl wrote:
Case in question ... I am not allowed to fix bug https://
bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520998, which I have filed some time
ago, watched that maintainer didn't do anything to it, finally after
discussing it with OpenSSL maintainer I have decided that upgrading to
the
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
One thing I think is unclear this cycle is the usage of the word Beta.
It's been said many times that beta is not really beta but actually
final freeze. For instance: If all goes as planned the Beta
(previously known as Final Development) Freeze in the message steved
Jesse Keating wrote:
We've tried to address unclear terminology this summer with the
milestone adjustment proposal.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Milestone_Adjustment_Proposal This tries
to apply industry standard naming to our release process, and as such we
had to rename some things.
The
Steve,
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 08:36 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/30/2009 07:22 AM, Howard Wilkinson wrote:
Steve,
just for clarity what you are actually saying is that.
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:45 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 09:42 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a
On 09/30/2009 11:07 AM, Howard Wilkinson wrote:
With version 4 there is this concept of a pseudo root. Which meanings
one can define, through exports, what the root of an export
can be. Which is a good idea because you can define /export as
the root, and nothing above /export can be
Jesse Keating wrote:
People with cargo cult knowledge knew what they meant but not new
contributers nor community users. The change was for the better as it
more clearly defines the milestones.
So clearly that many feature owners are confused about what they mean?
And don't forget that
On 09/30/2009 04:09 AM, Steve Dickson wrote:
I don't really understand this reason. When you get a mount fail, why
not try v3? It doesn't matter whether the kernel gives a different
kind of error or not.
The error that is returned is ENOENT which is fatal error because
it means the remote
After further review... by a number of people, its been decided
the /etc/nfsmount.conf file will be installed with the default
protocol version set to v3. This will stop the mount failures
with older Linux servers but make it very easy to make v4
the default version. A nice compromise, IMHO...
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 01:11:56PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
After further review... by a number of people, its been decided
the /etc/nfsmount.conf file will be installed with the default
protocol version set to v3. This will stop the mount failures
with older Linux servers but make it very
On 09/30/2009 01:47 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 01:11:56PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
After further review... by a number of people, its been decided
the /etc/nfsmount.conf file will be installed with the default
protocol version set to v3. This will stop the mount
Steve Dickson (ste...@redhat.com) said:
Right or wrong.. I took Final Feature Freeze as the last chance
of getting a feature into F12.. And I will be the first to admit I
do not read all the rule and regulations of all the steps of a
release... I look at dates.. When is the alpha and when
On 09/30/2009 03:18 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Steve Dickson (ste...@redhat.com) said:
Right or wrong.. I took Final Feature Freeze as the last chance
of getting a feature into F12.. And I will be the first to admit I
do not read all the rule and regulations of all the steps of a
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 19:00 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
So clearly that many feature owners are confused about what they mean?
A few feature owners missed the repeated messages. I'm sorry, it was
bound to happen. Change causes disruption, but often that disruption is
for the better good.
Jesse Keating wrote:
This isn't a post-facto justification. The only one-off for F12 was
the removal of the milestone previously known as alpha.
Making the renaming a one-time-only change as I'm proposing would be post
facto.
The rest of the milestone adjustment proposal came out of the
On 09/29/2009 05:43 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:33 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
Buyer Beware: A Major Change in NFS is about to happen
Which means you're about a month too late in making it for Fedora 12.
Please reconsider making this change, as we're /well/ past the
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought today was the dead line...
http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/372823-all-features-need-100-beta-freeze-2009-09-29-a.html
Plus all the kernel parts and the user level code have been in placed for
a few
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought today was the dead line...
http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/372823-all-features-need-100-beta-freeze-2009-09-29-a.html
I should mention that Beta is the deadline to have the code in what we
think is the final
On 09/29/2009 06:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought today was the dead line...
http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/372823-all-features-need-100-beta-freeze-2009-09-29-a.html
I should mention that Beta is the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought today was the dead line...
On 09/29/2009 06:55 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought today was the dead line...
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 07:12:03PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:55 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 17:52 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
I thought
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 19:16 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I think that what we need, Steve, is some sort of information
about
what testing has happened up to this point that satisfies FESCo
that
this change the equivalent of moving the needle from 99% complete
to
100% complete, as
On 09/29/2009 07:16 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 07:12:03PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:55 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 07:16 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 07:12:03PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:55 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:13
Steve Dickson said the following on 09/29/2009 04:35 PM Pacific Time:
On 09/29/2009 07:16 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 07:12:03PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 06:55 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:35PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 07:52 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
By no means did I interpret that at all... but here lies the
problem... I had no idea I would have to convenience *anybody*
of *anything* because I thought I made the dead line... again all
following was the schedule in:
On 09/29/2009 05:38 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 09/29/2009 08:17 PM, John Poelstra wrote:
[...snip...]
I want to be perfectly clear that I'm not sounding an all clear on
this by any means. If your answer here means that this change hasn't
been thoroughly tested, you're going to have a hard
Once upon a time, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com said:
On the server (Which is suggested):
* Add the following entry to the /etc/exports file:
/ *(ro,fsid=0) Note: 'fsid=0' is explained in the exports(5) man pages.
The suggested solution is to change your NFS servers (that work just
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com wrote:
My main concern is with installer, installing from NFS shares from older
servers, say RHEL5. How will anaconda handle mounting? Will there be
odd errors that are difficult to figure out? Has this been tested in
the
On 09/29/2009 09:42 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com said:
On the server (Which is suggested):
* Add the following entry to the /etc/exports file:
/ *(ro,fsid=0) Note: 'fsid=0' is explained in the exports(5) man pages.
The suggested solution
On 09/29/2009 09:21 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
One thing I think is unclear this cycle is the usage of the word Beta.
It's been said many times that beta is not really beta but actually
final freeze. For instance: If all goes as planned the Beta
(previously known as Final Development) Freeze
90 matches
Mail list logo
