date:20211119

Hi,

As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package oclock. I 
find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors and so would like 
to maintain it.  But first, I need a review. Could someone please help review 
the package? 

Thanks,
aa...@fedoraproject.org.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: question on fedorapeople space

Thank you, your answer makes sense and clarifies to me what is on the 
instructions page. If I were editing the page, I would make sure that it says 
somewhere that we need to ssh in and then create the directories and 
permissions. the first part is not mentioned anywhere on that page.

Thanks again.






On Friday, November 19, 2021, 07:47:28 PM CST, Ben Beasley 
 wrote: 





I am guessing that the public_html/ directory in your home directory 
does not exist or does not have the read and/or execute bits set for all 
users. Try:

$ ssh aa...@fedorapeople.org 'mkdir -p public_html; chmod 0755 public_html'

to make sure the directory exists with the correct permissions.

On 11/19/21 19:33, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I have been trying to upload a couple of my files to my fedorapeople.org 
> space following the instructions here: 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/fedorapeople.org#fedorapeople.org
>  and have been confused.
> 
> Actually, I go to my https://aarem.fedorapeople.org/ account and get:
> 
> Forbidden
> 
> You don't have permission to access / on this server.
> 
> I wonder what I should do to get this space working? My profile lists the 
> space, but I am unclear as to how to make it accessible to others including 
> me.
> 
> Thanks!
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

> 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

2021-11-19 Thread updates

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  63  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f005e1b879   
debmirror-2.35-1.el7
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-70fe95babd   
openssl11-1.1.1k-2.el7


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing

python-resultsdb_api-2.1.5-3.el7

Details about builds:



 python-resultsdb_api-2.1.5-3.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f08778a753)
 Interface api to ResultsDB

Update Information:

This update backports [a fix](https://pagure.io/taskotron/resultsdb_api/pull-
request/14) for a problem which caused version 2.1.5 not to work on urllib3
versions earlier than 1.26.0. This didn't affect Fedora 35, but we are updating
the package there just to keep the versions in order.    - Drop use of
deprecated Retry parameter - Drop unnecessary `_KEEP` and just `None` instead -
Make tox work (just runs pytest for now) - Port tests to unittest.mock and
ResultsDB API v2 (#1) - Simplify update_testcase - update_testcase: fix variable
name - ResultsDBAuth: it's `@staticmethod`, not `@static_method` - Drop Python 2
string type blob - Enable tests during the rpm build

ChangeLog:

* Fri Nov 19 2021 Adam Williamson  - 2.1.5-3
- Update the patch from -2 to *really* fix the problem
* Fri Nov 19 2021 Adam Williamson  - 2.1.5-2
- Fix Retry allowed methods for urllib 1.25 (F34 and earlier)
* Sun Nov 14 2021 Frantisek Zatloukal  - 2.1.5-1
- Drop use of deprecated Retry parameter
- Drop unnecessary `_KEEP` and just `None` instead
- Make tox work (just runs pytest for now)
- Port tests to unittest.mock and ResultsDB API v2 (#1)
- Simplify update_testcase
- update_testcase: fix variable name
- ResultsDBAuth: it's `@staticmethod`, not `@static_method`
- Drop Python 2 string type blob
- Enable tests during the rpm build
* Mon Nov  8 2021 Frantisek Zatloukal  - 2.1.4-1
- add auth class with basic http auth support


___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: question on fedorapeople space

2021-11-19 Thread Ben Beasley

I am guessing that the public_html/ directory in your home directory 
does not exist or does not have the read and/or execute bits set for all 
users. Try:


$ ssh aa...@fedorapeople.org 'mkdir -p public_html; chmod 0755 public_html'

to make sure the directory exists with the correct permissions.

On 11/19/21 19:33, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:

Hello,

I have been trying to upload a couple of my files to my fedorapeople.org space 
following the instructions here: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/fedorapeople.org#fedorapeople.org 
and have been confused.

Actually, I go to my https://aarem.fedorapeople.org/ account and get:

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access / on this server.

I wonder what I should do to get this space working? My profile lists the 
space, but I am unclear as to how to make it accessible to others including me.

Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL9 Rollout Proposals

2021-11-19 Thread Carl George

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 5:26 PM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:
>
> Dne 20. 11. 21 v 0:04 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> > Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass 
> > branch over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)
>
> And again with 9.1 GA? And again with 9.2 GA? // I do not expect answer, just 
> pointing that minor releases should be
> part of the solution.
>
> Miroslav
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Historically most EPEL packages don't need to be rebuilt with every
minor release, as RHEL libraries don't change often.  When they do
need to be rebuilt, it's been left up to the individual maintainers to
take care of as their time allows.  This has mostly worked OK for us.

Plan A would be a departure from the norm, where we do a mass rebuild
at 9.0 for a "bootstrap" of epel9 content from epel9-next.  At the
last EPEL Steering Committee meeting we talked about doing mass
rebuilds at every future minor release, but more or less agreed that
this would be overkill and would result in a drastic increase in disk
usage in the infrastructure.  Additionally our existing mass rebuild
tooling doesn't account for changes that exist in the epel9-next
branches that need to be merged to the epel9 branches before building.

Plans B and C are more like the status quo, where packagers target
epel9, and do individual package rebuilds as needed after a RHEL minor
release.

-- 
Carl George
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Test-Announce] 2021-11-22 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

2021-11-19 Thread Adam Williamson

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2021-11-22
# Time: ** 16:00 ** UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat

Greetings testers!

We didn't meet for a few weeks and there's quite a lot of active
topics, so let's get together on Monday!

Note that as clocks have now gone back everywhere that observes
Daylight Savings Time (I think), the meeting time changes to 16:00 UTC.
If you are in a region that observes daylight savings, the meeting
should be at **THE SAME** local time as usual. If you are in a region
that does not observe daylight savings, the meeting will be **ONE HOUR
LATER** than it was before. You can use `date -u` to check the current
UTC time; also see the UTCHowto link above.

If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this
email and suggest them! Thanks.

== Proposed Agenda Topics ==

1. Previous meeting follow-up
2. Fedora 36 status
3. Fedora 35 Retrospective thoughts
4. Current criteria / test case proposals
5. Test Day / community event status
6. Open floor
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

question on fedorapeople space

Hello, 

I have been trying to upload a couple of my files to my fedorapeople.org space 
following the instructions here: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/fedorapeople.org#fedorapeople.org 
and have been confused.

Actually, I go to my https://aarem.fedorapeople.org/ account and get:

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access / on this server.

I wonder what I should do to get this space working? My profile lists the 
space, but I am unclear as to how to make it accessible to others including me. 

Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Python RPM dependency generator does not support PEP 508?

2021-11-19 Thread Michel Alexandre Salim

On Fri, 2021-11-12 at 10:24 -0500, Ben Beasley wrote:
> I know this pattern works in general, because I maintain several Python
> packages in which it is used.
> 
> I tried modifying python-fixit to patch requirements.txt as you 
> described. I confirmed the line appeared in the “prepped” source as you
> have written. Then I built it with mock and installed it into a Rawhide
> chroot without difficulty.
> 
> My best guess is that there was a mix-up in which RPM version you were 
> trying to install—something that’s probably happened to all of us. 
> Perhaps you built it in Rawhide and didn’t use --enablerepo=local when 
> testing the installation?
> 

Ah, that's likely what happened. And indeed, < '3.7' is better. Thanks!

Now we have something we can upstream, while just yanking out that line
likely won't fly:

https://github.com/Instagram/Fixit/pull/206

Best regards,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL9 Rollout Proposals


Dne 20. 11. 21 v 0:04 Troy Dawson napsal(a):

Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass branch 
over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)


And again with 9.1 GA? And again with 9.2 GA? // I do not expect answer, just pointing that minor releases should be 
part of the solution.


Miroslav
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?

2021-11-19 Thread Reon Beon via devel

Done: https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra/fedy/issues/90
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL9 Rollout Proposals

2021-11-19 Thread Troy Dawson

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 2:16 PM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

> Dne 18. 11. 21 v 20:31 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> > - epel9-next stays the way it is currently setup.
>
> Ehm, what is the current setup?
>
>
Sorry about that.  You are correct.  I didn't say how epel9-next is
currently setup.
It is currently setup similar to epel8-next, except for a few key
differences.

1 - epel8-next is built off the CentOS Stream 8 AppStream, BaseOS, and CRB
repos.
epel9-next is currently being built off the CentOS Stream 9 buildroot

2 - epel8-next repo is supposed to be layered on top of epel8, and only
have those packages that would install on CentOS Stream 8, but not on
RHEL8.  This is normally very few packages.
-- Since there is no epel9 at this time, all packages have to be in
epel9-next


>
> And mainly, when I build something in EPEL next, something not compatible
> with EPEL. How it gets to EPEL when next RHEL
> 9.x gets released? I see nothing relevant at
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-updates/
>
> The
>
>https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-about-next/
>
> state that maintainer should do rebuild manually after the release of
> RHEL. That sound error-prone and leaves wide time
> gap when there may be broken deps.
>

That is what this rollout proposal is about, figuring out the best way to
do this rollout.

Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass
branch over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)
As you said, this can be error prone and could leave a wide time gap.

Do we start epel9 now, and have it be like epel8 and epel8-next right now?
(Plan B and C)
If so, where do we get the RHEL9 packages?
>From RHEL 9 Beta ? (Plan B)
>From CentOS Stream 9 ? (Plan C)

Is there a Plan D that hasn't been brought up yet?

Troy
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: RFC: Reduce number of packages that are built for i686


Dne 17. 11. 21 v 22:44 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):

So, wine needs i686 multilib packages on x86_64 even if you don't want
to use it to run games, but just for running*any*  Windows
application


Beside games that is: accounting SW, photobook creation, legal sw, logistic sw, 


I just checked several SWs which I used to use under WINE and even the recent versions (windows only) are distributed as 
WIN32 binaries.


Miroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL9 Rollout Proposals


Dne 18. 11. 21 v 20:31 Troy Dawson napsal(a):

- epel9-next stays the way it is currently setup.


Ehm, what is the current setup?


And mainly, when I build something in EPEL next, something not compatible with EPEL. How it gets to EPEL when next RHEL 
9.x gets released? I see nothing relevant at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-updates/


The

  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-about-next/

state that maintainer should do rebuild manually after the release of RHEL. That sound error-prone and leaves wide time 
gap when there may be broken deps.


Miroslav
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Seeking maintainers of mathematical packages

2021-11-19 Thread Jerry James

For some years now, I have maintained a collection of mathematical packages
and some of their dependencies in Fedora.  I actually stopped using the
packages in question awhile ago, but have been maintaining them out of
inertia.  I would like to free up time to get some code checking and formal
methods packages into Fedora.  But I need to divest myself of the sagemath
and Macaulay2 stacks in order to have time to do so.

There are 241 packages listed below.  I am primary maintainer for 217 of
them.  Before anybody panics, I am not talking about orphaning them now.
My plan is to spend the next 12 months searching for people willing to step
into the primary maintainer role for these packages.  I will repeat this
message at regular intervals in hope of finding willing participants.  One
year from now, if I have not given all of these packages away, then I will
orphan the rest.

This is not a collection of packages that is falling apart.  They are high
quality packages.  Very little needs to be done right away.

If you have interest in any of the listed packages, please get in touch.
It doesn't matter if you are currently a Fedora packager or not.  If not, I
will sponsor you via the comaintainer path, and stick around until you feel
comfortable handling the package yourself.  It doesn't matter if you are
interested in only a single package.  Contact me anyway.

To help those who may be new to packaging, I have started documenting some
of my workflows.  I have a set of web pages rooted here:

https://jamezone.org/pleasure/software/Fedora/packager/

Those pages contain walk-throughs and examples illustrating how I approach
various tasks.  I'm willing to donate any of that content to Fedora, so if
you see something you think should be on docs.fedoraproject.org, feel free
to tell me so.  Also feel free to suggest additions or changes to what I
have there.

Packages for which I am the primary maintainer
--
4ti2
GAPDoc
TOPCOM
antic
arb
azove
bigloo
bliss
carat
check
clblast
clisp
cocoalib
cohomCalg
coin-or-Data-Netlib
coin-or-Data-miplib3
coxeter
cryptominisat
csdp
cxsc
e-antic
ecl
eclib
ffcall
fflas-ffpack
flintqs
freetdi-gala
gap
gap-pkg-ace
gap-pkg-aclib
gap-pkg-alnuth
gap-pkg-atlasrep
gap-pkg-autodoc
gap-pkg-automata
gap-pkg-autpgrp
gap-pkg-browse
gap-pkg-caratinterface
gap-pkg-circle
gap-pkg-cohomolo
gap-pkg-congruence
gap-pkg-corelg
gap-pkg-crime
gap-pkg-crisp
gap-pkg-crypting
gap-pkg-cryst
gap-pkg-crystcat
gap-pkg-ctbllib
gap-pkg-curlinterface
gap-pkg-cvec
gap-pkg-datastructures
gap-pkg-design
gap-pkg-digraphs
gap-pkg-edim
gap-pkg-factint
gap-pkg-ferret
gap-pkg-fga
gap-pkg-fining
gap-pkg-float
gap-pkg-format
gap-pkg-forms
gap-pkg-fr
gap-pkg-francy
gap-pkg-gbnp
gap-pkg-genss
gap-pkg-grape
gap-pkg-groupoids
gap-pkg-grpconst
gap-pkg-guava
gap-pkg-hap
gap-pkg-hapcryst
gap-pkg-happrime
gap-pkg-hecke
gap-pkg-images
gap-pkg-io
gap-pkg-irredsol
gap-pkg-json
gap-pkg-jupyterkernel
gap-pkg-jupyterviz
gap-pkg-laguna
gap-pkg-liealgdb
gap-pkg-liepring
gap-pkg-liering
gap-pkg-loops
gap-pkg-lpres
gap-pkg-mapclass
gap-pkg-nautytracesinterface
gap-pkg-nq
gap-pkg-openmath
gap-pkg-orb
gap-pkg-polenta
gap-pkg-polycyclic
gap-pkg-polymaking
gap-pkg-primgrp
gap-pkg-profiling
gap-pkg-qpa
gap-pkg-quagroup
gap-pkg-radiroot
gap-pkg-recog
gap-pkg-repsn
gap-pkg-resclasses
gap-pkg-scscp
gap-pkg-semigroups
gap-pkg-singular
gap-pkg-sla
gap-pkg-smallgrp
gap-pkg-smallsemi
gap-pkg-sonata
gap-pkg-sophus
gap-pkg-spinsym
gap-pkg-tomlib
gap-pkg-toric
gap-pkg-transgrp
gap-pkg-utils
gap-pkg-uuid
gap-pkg-xmod
gap-pkg-zeromqinterface
gcl
gf2x
gfan
gmp-ecm
gnofract4d
gp2c
iml
java-diff-utils
javacc-maven-plugin
jline
jmol
jni-inchi
jol
juniversalchardet
latte-integrale
libbraiding
libdivide
libfplll
libgpuarray
libhomfly
libpoly
libsemigroups
libsvm
linbox
lrslib
m4ri
m4rie
material-icons-fonts
mathic
mathicgb
maven-doxia
maven-doxia-sitetools
maven-reporting-api
maven-reporting-impl
mcqd
memtailor
minisat2
mpfi
mpsolve
naga
nauty
normaliz
ocaml-tplib
pari
pari-elldata
pari-galdata
pari-galpol
pari-nflistdata
pari-nftables
pari-seadata
permlib
pl
polymake
polyml
primecount
pynac
python-BTrees
python-ZEO
python-ZODB
python-ZODB3
python-fastcache
python-gmpy2
python-j1m.sphinxautozconfig
python-jupymake
python-jupyter-kernel-singular
python-jupyter-polymake
python-manuel
python-pari-jupyter
python-persistent
python-pplpy
python-pysingular
python-random2
python-readthedocs-sphinx-ext
python-repoze-sphinx-autointerface
python-sphinx-copy-button
python-sphinx-math-dollar
python-sphinx-testing
python-sphinx_rtd_theme
python-sphinxcontrib-zopeext
python-tdlib
python-theano
python-zodbpickle
python-zope-testrunner
qd
qepcad-B
rubiks
saclib
scala
scalacheck
sharedmeataxe
sirocco
stp
subunit
symmetrica
sympol
sympy
tlx
tth
vinci
xgap
zn_poly

Packages for which I am comaintainer.  This serves as notice to the primary
maintainers that I am stepping away from actively working on these packages.
The primary maintainer is

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?


Dne 19. 11. 21 v 15:10 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 07:12, Neal Gompa  wrote:

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:05 AM Ahmed Almeleh
  wrote:

I do think voting for packages to be included in the next Fedora release is an 
amazing idea maybe we could create a survey through Google forms or make a  
custom website for Fedora. I.e. Telling users select all packages you would 
like to see in Fedora 36.


It's a horrible idea, because it will just lead to disappointed users.
Nothing compels anyone to do anything about that, so people who fill
them out and see no results would just get angry at us.


To clarify. Packages in Fedora are there because of volunteers.
Outside of a small subset of glibc/kernel and some other items, all
the packages maintained by a Red Hat employee are there on that
person's volunteer time. The project has no power to compel a packager
to pick up a package and the project has no power to compel a packager
to keep a package when they want to let it go.


+1

Usually when you put package on wishlist, it sits there indefinitely.

If you want to add package to Fedora you need to:

1) add it there yourselv 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/
 or

2) find someone who will do that for you. You can motivate someone by bounty, employ them, poison them with your 
enthusiasm :) ... In past, I wanted to mediate a list of people available for hire, but no one had actually interest. :(


Miroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2025106] New: perl-PDL-2.063 is available

2021-11-19 Thread bugzilla

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025106

Bug ID: 2025106
   Summary: perl-PDL-2.063 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-PDL
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproj...@gmail.com,
jakub.jedel...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
ka...@ucw.cz, lkund...@v3.sk,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
rhug...@redhat.com, rstr...@redhat.com,
sandm...@redhat.com, tjczep...@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 2.063
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.57.0-1.fc36
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/PDL/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/3205/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025106
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Carl George

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 12:33 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 01:22:32PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:15 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> > >
> > > On 19. 11. 21 17:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen  > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  > > > > wrote:
> > > >  >
> > > >  > Hello EPEL people,
> > > >  >
> > > >  > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit 
> > > > to 3 days for
> > > >  > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> > > >  >
> > > >
> > > > I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> > > > should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > >
> > > There seem to be a consensus, do I file a ticket at infra, or does the 
> > > EPSCo
> > > need to approve it a meeting?
> > >
> >
> > Please file a ticket with infra about it.
>
> wow... consensus in 1.5 hours. :)
>
> Perhaps this should be discussed at the next meeting? To allow
> interested parties to actually see it and comment?

+1 to putting this on the agenda for next week's meeting.

>
> Anyhow, I'm personally fine with it, but note that 3 days leaves very
> little time for testing. One of those days is likely mirror sync/getting
> the update, so interested testers would need to update at least every
> day to make sure and not miss out.
>
> kevin
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure



-- 
Carl George
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Bodhi "Re-Trigger Tests" now works for openQA tests

2021-11-19 Thread Adam Williamson

Hi folks! Just wanted to let you know that Bodhi's "Re-Trigger Tests"
mechanism should now also work for tests run by openQA. Previously, it
only worked for tests run by Fedora CI.

From now on, if you hit "Re-Trigger Tests" or run `bodhi updates
trigger-tests` on an update that openQA has run some tests on, it will
re-schedule the tests.

Technically speaking, it finds all 'flavors' (these are "updates-
container", "updates-everything-boot-iso" etc.) for which tests have
previously been run on the update, and schedules a new run of the tests
for those flavors. This means that in a corner case (where we changed
the test definitions themselves since the previous run(s)) the exact
same set of tests may not be run again. It also means that *all* tests
are always restarted, not just failed ones.

Please let me know, and/or file an issue at
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/fedora_openqa/issues , if you have any
problems with this.

Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:32 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 01:22:32PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:15 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> > >
> > > On 19. 11. 21 17:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen  > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  > > > > wrote:
> > > >  >
> > > >  > Hello EPEL people,
> > > >  >
> > > >  > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit 
> > > > to 3 days for
> > > >  > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> > > >  >
> > > >
> > > > I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> > > > should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > >
> > > There seem to be a consensus, do I file a ticket at infra, or does the 
> > > EPSCo
> > > need to approve it a meeting?
> > >
> >
> > Please file a ticket with infra about it.
>
> wow... consensus in 1.5 hours. :)
>
> Perhaps this should be discussed at the next meeting? To allow
> interested parties to actually see it and comment?
>
> Anyhow, I'm personally fine with it, but note that 3 days leaves very
> little time for testing. One of those days is likely mirror sync/getting
> the update, so interested testers would need to update at least every
> day to make sure and not miss out.
>

Considering the state of CentOS Stream 9 and RHEL 9 right now, I'm
inclined to consider it at the same stage as branched Fedora. We can
always raise it later if we want.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Kevin Fenzi

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 01:22:32PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:15 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> >
> > On 19. 11. 21 17:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen  > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  > > > wrote:
> > >  >
> > >  > Hello EPEL people,
> > >  >
> > >  > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 
> > > 3 days for
> > >  > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> > >  >
> > >
> > > I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> > > should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
> > >
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > There seem to be a consensus, do I file a ticket at infra, or does the EPSCo
> > need to approve it a meeting?
> >
> 
> Please file a ticket with infra about it.

wow... consensus in 1.5 hours. :) 

Perhaps this should be discussed at the next meeting? To allow
interested parties to actually see it and comment?

Anyhow, I'm personally fine with it, but note that 3 days leaves very
little time for testing. One of those days is likely mirror sync/getting
the update, so interested testers would need to update at least every
day to make sure and not miss out. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 1:15 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
>
> On 19. 11. 21 17:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen  > > wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  > > wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Hello EPEL people,
> >  >
> >  > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 
> > days for
> >  > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> >  >
> >
> > I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> > should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
> >
> >
> > +1
>
> There seem to be a consensus, do I file a ticket at infra, or does the EPSCo
> need to approve it a meeting?
>

Please file a ticket with infra about it.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Miro Hrončok


On 19. 11. 21 17:54, Troy Dawson wrote:



On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen > wrote:


On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok mailto:mhron...@redhat.com>> wrote:
 >
 > Hello EPEL people,
 >
 > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 days 
for
 > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
 >

I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.


+1


There seem to be a consensus, do I file a ticket at infra, or does the EPSCo 
need to approve it a meeting?


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: xorg-macros

2021-11-19 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 01:57:12PM +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> I opened the following:
> 
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396
> 
> I am not quite sure what happens after this, so I thought that I would 
> mention this here.

The package needs to go through re-review, because it was retired for
more than 8 weeks. See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_Process/#claiming
 .

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

2021-11-19 Thread Stephen Gallagher

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 10:03 AM Stephen Gallagher  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 7:02 AM  wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > You are kindly invited to the meeting:
> >ELN SIG on 2021-11-19 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
> >At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
> >
> > The meeting will be about:
>
>
> * Python requesting permission to use the %{eln} macro in
> python-rpm-macros - https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/73
> * Status of ELN Compose outage
>
> Anyone have other topics?

===
#fedora-meeting: ELN SIG 2021-11-19
===

Meeting started by StephenGallagher at 17:00:02 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-11-19/eln.2021-11-19-17.00.log.html
.

Meeting summary
---
* Init Process  (StephenGallagher, 17:00:03)

* Fedora Python and the Mysterious %{eln} variable  (StephenGallagher,
  17:02:58)
  * LINK: https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/73
(StephenGallagher, 17:02:58)
  * AGREED: The python macros are permitted to use the %eln macro as
described in https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/73
(StephenGallagher, 17:50:21)

* ELN Compose Issues: The Next Generation  (StephenGallagher, 17:51:11)

Meeting ended at 17:59:58 UTC.

Action Items

Action Items, by person
---
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)

People Present (lines said)
---
* StephenGallagher (74)
* mhroncok (70)
* zodbot (18)
* jforbes (13)
* cyberpear (9)
* salimma[m] (7)
* dcavalca (3)
* tdawson (3)
* salimma (3)
* davdunc (2)
* MichelAlexandreS (2)
* copperi[m] (2)
* nirik (1)

Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.4

.. _`MeetBot`: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: packaging sourcegraph cli -- any volunteers?

2021-11-19 Thread Matthew Miller

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:11:49AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Probably "sourcegraph" or "srcgraph". Have you asked them to consider
> renaming it upstream?

I mentioned it to them, yeah. They seemed open.


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Troy Dawson

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:46 AM Stephen John Smoogen 
wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> >
> > Hello EPEL people,
> >
> > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 days
> for
> > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> >
>
> I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
>

+1
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:45 AM Stephen John Smoogen  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> >
> > Hello EPEL people,
> >
> > what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 days for
> > EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
> >
>
> I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
> should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.
>

Yes, please!



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Stephen John Smoogen

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 11:42, Miro Hrončok  wrote:
>
> Hello EPEL people,
>
> what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 days for
> EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?
>

I think EPEL-9 Next being based off of Stream with its major changes
should have a small stable limit. 3 days sounds about right.



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle. -- Ian MacClaren
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] EPEL 9 Next Bodhi updates: Set lower days to stable limit?

2021-11-19 Thread Miro Hrončok


Hello EPEL people,

what do you think about setting the Bodhi days to stable limit to 3 days for 
EPEL 9 Next (at least until RHEL 9 GA)?


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: packaging sourcegraph cli -- any volunteers?

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 10:49 AM Matthew Miller
 wrote:
>
> I've been talking with the awesome people at Sourcegraph, and they're
> interested in indexing our packages. Still working out what that'l look like
> exactly, but I'm pretty excited about it. (They're an open-source company
> with a SaaS product. Also at least some of their folks run Fedora Linux, so
> that's extra cool.)
>
> In our conversation, they mentioned that it'd be nice to have their
> command-line tool packaged. Anyone interested in taking that on? Looks
> pretty straightforward, although I'm not sure of any Go lang pitfalls that
> might await.
>
> https://github.com/sourcegraph/src-cli
>
> (Also, we already have a package named `src`, which is a apparently and RCS
> (?!?!?!) wrapper. So we'll need to figure out a different comand name;
> maybe src-cli, maybe 'sourcegraph', dunno.)
>

Probably "sourcegraph" or "srcgraph". Have you asked them to consider
renaming it upstream?

>
> They'd also be interested in having the actual search engine tool itself
> packaged (https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph) -- but that's a bigger
> project. (Still, volunteers welcome!)
>

That'd be nice!



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

packaging sourcegraph cli -- any volunteers?

2021-11-19 Thread Matthew Miller

I've been talking with the awesome people at Sourcegraph, and they're
interested in indexing our packages. Still working out what that'l look like
exactly, but I'm pretty excited about it. (They're an open-source company
with a SaaS product. Also at least some of their folks run Fedora Linux, so
that's extra cool.)

In our conversation, they mentioned that it'd be nice to have their
command-line tool packaged. Anyone interested in taking that on? Looks
pretty straightforward, although I'm not sure of any Go lang pitfalls that
might await. 

https://github.com/sourcegraph/src-cli

(Also, we already have a package named `src`, which is a apparently and RCS
(?!?!?!) wrapper. So we'll need to figure out a different comand name;
maybe src-cli, maybe 'sourcegraph', dunno.)


They'd also be interested in having the actual search engine tool itself
packaged (https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph) -- but that's a bigger
project. (Still, volunteers welcome!)

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: spec file error (updated)

updated the spec files for both gbuffy and libPropList. However, I wonder how 
to license it: currently they are under GPL and LGPL. Should these be GPLv2.1 
and LGPLv2.1 since these are really old packages (even though I cleaned up 
gbuffy some). Btw, if I patch up a package that does not seem to be maintained, 
am I better off changing the name to avoid potential conflicts?

I doubt that anyone would use this package, no one other than me appears to 
have felt the need and while I have used these for years, I would be happy to 
submit these to Fedora.

Thanks!
aa...@fedoraproject.org





On Thursday, November 11, 2021, 08:16:11 AM CST, David Cantrell 
 wrote: 





Vitaly replied in this thread as well with other spec file changes you
need to make to align with current packaging guidelines.  For
reference:

    https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/

Other replies below...

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 09:48:24PM +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
>My apologies, i spoke too soon.
>
>I updated Makefile.in to be:
>
>install: gbuffy
>    ./mkinstalldirs $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)
>    $(INSTALL) gbuffy $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)
>
>Here is my updated spec file:
>
>%define ver  0.2.8
>%define rel 1%{?dist}
>
>Summary: multiple mailbox buffy for GTK+
>Name: gbuffy
>Version: %ver
>Release: %rel
>License: GPL

The License value needs to match a license abbreviation from this page:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses

For more information, see:

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/

You may combine multiple short license names using the "and" and "or"
keywords.  The packaging guidelines explain this in more detail.

>Group: Applications/Communications
>Source0: ~/C.libs/linux/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2
>Source1: http://www.fiction.net/blong/programs/gbuffy/gbuffy-%{ver}.tar.gz

I don't understand what Source0 is here.  Source0 should be the
upstream source archive.  Then you should add a Patch0 patch that
makes the change to Makefile.in.  The %autosetup macro in %prep will
apply that patch after unpacking Source0.


>BuildRoot:  %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-%(%{__id_u} -n)
>URL: http://www.fiction.net/blong/programs/gbuffy
>BuildRequires:  libPropList
>
>%description
>GBuffy is a GTK+ multiple mailbox "biff" program. It is conceptually
>based on XBuffy by Bill Pemberton, but is a complete rewrite from
>scratch.
>
>GBuffy will poll multiple mailboxes for new mail. It will list the
>number of new messages in each mailbox you configure. It will also
>highlight the mailboxes which have new mail.
>
>GBuffy is currently capable of watching MBOX, MMDF, Maildir and MH
>Folders. This version also supports IMAP4rev1 and NNTP with XOVER
>mailboxes.
>
>%prep
>%setup -q
>
>%configure
>%make_build
>
>%install
>%make_install
>
>%files
>%defattr(-,root,root,-)
>%doc CHANGES README
>%license LICENSE
>%{_bindir}/%{name}
>
>%clean
>
>
>
>
>
>However, I still have some problems:
>
>
>...
>+ cd gbuffy-0.2.8
>+ /usr/bin/make install 
>DESTDIR=/home/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/gbuffy-0.2.8-1.fc35.x86_64 
>'INSTALL=/usr/bin/install -p'
>./mkinstalldirs /home/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/gbuffy-0.2.8-1.fc35.x86_64/usr/bin
>make: ./mkinstalldirs: Permission denied
>make: *** [Makefile:50: install] Error 127
>error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.QLLNwm (%install)
>
>
>RPM build errors:
>    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.QLLNwm (%install)
>
>
>
>Is there something I did not do correctly?
>
>Many thanks!

>___
>devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>Fedora Code of Conduct: 
>https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>List Archives: 
>https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
>https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

-- 
David Cantrell 
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:

Re: fedpkg mockbuild with %{autorelease -p}

2021-11-19 Thread Ankur Sinha

On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 12:40:01 +, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Hi folks,

Replacing %{autorelease -p} with %autorelease -p (removing the curly
brackets) seems to make it work. So, solved :)

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?

2021-11-19 Thread Stephen John Smoogen

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 07:12, Neal Gompa  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:05 AM Ahmed Almeleh
>  wrote:
> >
> > I do think voting for packages to be included in the next Fedora release is 
> > an amazing idea maybe we could create a survey through Google forms or make 
> > a  custom website for Fedora. I.e. Telling users select all packages you 
> > would like to see in Fedora 36.
> >
>
> It's a horrible idea, because it will just lead to disappointed users.
> Nothing compels anyone to do anything about that, so people who fill
> them out and see no results would just get angry at us.
>

To clarify. Packages in Fedora are there because of volunteers.
Outside of a small subset of glibc/kernel and some other items, all
the packages maintained by a Red Hat employee are there on that
person's volunteer time. The project has no power to compel a packager
to pick up a package and the project has no power to compel a packager
to keep a package when they want to let it go.

In the end, these sorts of lists are only useful when a project is
starting out and people can say 'Oh i really want this' enough that a
packager with free time takes it up. When a project is fully going and
most packagers have reached their limit.. these lists have multiple
negative effects:
1. People don't see the package getting added and are disappointed
2. Packagers can feel extra put upon as most of them are already overburdened.
3. New packagers usually see these packages, and find themselves
drowning in trying to take these on. First the packages are never easy
to package up. Second even when they are, there are a lot of rules and
nuances to rules which need to be mastered to deal with
updates/upgrades and not stomping on someone else's package.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle. -- Ian MacClaren
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: xorg-macros

I opened the following:

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396

I am not quite sure what happens after this, so I thought that I would mention 
this here.

Thanks!




On Friday, November 19, 2021, 07:07:43 AM CST, Globe Trotter via devel 
 wrote: 





Oh, the package is called pkgconfig(xorg-macros), sorry for the goofup.

OK, oclock builds, I have filed a ticket on releng to unorphan the package.






On Friday, November 19, 2021, 03:39:37 AM CST, Björn 'besser82' Esser 
 wrote: 





Am Freitag, dem 19.11.2021 um 06:17 + schrieb Globe Trotter via

devel:
> Hi,
> 
> oclock has been orphaned from F35 so i was trying to roll my own rpm
> (building off the spec file for F34). I noticed that the spec file
> contains:
> 
> BuildRequires:  pkgconfig(xorg-macros) >= 1.8
> 
> but I can not find this in the F34 repos. Where do I get this? If I
> succeed with rolling a oclock rpm, I would like to submit and maintain
> the package.


Simply ask dnf:

```
$dnf whatprovides 'pkgconfig(xorg-macros)';
DNSSEC extension: Testing already imported keys for their validity.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:28:05 ago on Fri Nov 19 10:08:01 2021.
xorg-x11-util-macros-1.19.3-3.fc35.noarch : X.Org X11 Autotools macros
Repo        : fedora
Matched from:
Provide    : pkgconfig(xorg-macros) = 1.19.3

```

Björn

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: sjenning

2021-11-19 Thread Arthur Bols

On 19/11/2021 03:55, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:

(Eventually) going down the pam-u2f upgrade
process was on my infinitely countable TODO
list for some time. Thanks for raising it!

I am also willing to be a (co)-maintainer for pam-u2f
if needed/necessary/desired (I am the maintainer for
what will end up being a new dependency with a
recent pam-u2f, i.e. libfido2).

As I recall, upgrading pam-u2f to a recent release
would allow orphaning/removing of a couple of the
dependencies (libu2f-server/client).
That is correct! They should be pretty much useless after upgrading
pam-u2f.

Seth has replied to the bugzilla bug, we'll see what he decides. I think
it's definitely useful for you to be at least a co-maintainer, since
pam-u2f depends on libfido2. I will be using pam-u2f for probably a very
long time, so I wouldn't mind co-maintaining both if you would like some
help.

Relevant docs:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_encouraging_comaintainers_of_packages

Arthur

On 19/11/2021 03:55, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 11:10 PM Arthur Bols wrote:

Hi,

Does anyone know if Seth Jennings (sjenning) is stil active in Fedora? I
sent him an email in June without response.
The package pam-u2f has been outdated for a while and I've created the
non-responsive maintainer bug [1]. There is also a bug open for pyscard [2].

Please ping me on irc (principis) or reply to this email if anyone knows
anything. I'm would like to maintain pam-u2f if needed.

(Eventually) going down the pam-u2f upgrade
process was on my infinitely countable TODO
list for some time. Thanks for raising it!

I am also willing to be a (co)-maintainer for pam-u2f
if needed/necessary/desired (I am the maintainer for
what will end up being a new dependency with a
recent pam-u2f, i.e. libfido2).

As I recall, upgrading pam-u2f to a recent release
would allow orphaning/removing of a couple of the
dependencies (libu2f-server/client).

FWIW, I have been building (recent) pam-u2f
versions in copr for my own use for a while now
(so I even have a recently valid spec file should
one want).

Thanks!
___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email todevel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List
Archives:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: xorg-macros

Oh, the package is called pkgconfig(xorg-macros), sorry for the goofup.

OK, oclock builds, I have filed a ticket on releng to unorphan the package.






On Friday, November 19, 2021, 03:39:37 AM CST, Björn 'besser82' Esser 
 wrote: 





Am Freitag, dem 19.11.2021 um 06:17 + schrieb Globe Trotter via

devel:
> Hi,
> 
> oclock has been orphaned from F35 so i was trying to roll my own rpm
> (building off the spec file for F34). I noticed that the spec file
> contains:
> 
> BuildRequires:  pkgconfig(xorg-macros) >= 1.8
> 
> but I can not find this in the F34 repos. Where do I get this? If I
> succeed with rolling a oclock rpm, I would like to submit and maintain
> the package.


Simply ask dnf:

```
$dnf whatprovides 'pkgconfig(xorg-macros)';
DNSSEC extension: Testing already imported keys for their validity.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:28:05 ago on Fri Nov 19 10:08:01 2021.
xorg-x11-util-macros-1.19.3-3.fc35.noarch : X.Org X11 Autotools macros
Repo        : fedora
Matched from:
Provide    : pkgconfig(xorg-macros) = 1.19.3

```

Björn

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?

2021-11-19 Thread Casper

Tomasz Torcz a écrit :
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 05:32:28AM -, Reon Beon via devel wrote:
> > Video2X would be a nice add.
> 
>   There's a package wishlist here:
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainers_wishlist
> 
>   But adding the package there is no guarantee anyone will pick it up.
> I believe most items are there for years without action.
>   Best way is to become a packager and add a package by yourself:
>   
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/
> 
+1

package wishlist for rpmfusion is here:
https://rpmfusion.org/Wishlist

regards,
-- 
GnuPG: AE157E0B29F0BEF2 at keys.openpgp.org
CA Cert: https://dl.casperlefantom.net/pub/ssl/root.der
Jabber/XMPP Messaging: cas...@casperlefantom.net


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

fedpkg mockbuild with %{autorelease -p}

2021-11-19 Thread Ankur Sinha

Hi folks,

I'm working on a new package, and am using the forge macros and the rpm
autospec macros. The current WIP spec is here:
https://pagure.io/python-neurotune/blob/main/f/python-neurotune.spec

When running `fedpkg mockbuild` here, I get an odd error where it writes
a src.rpm with a release string (0.1..), but looks for a different value
to build (0.2..).

Have I done something wrong here or is this a bug somewhere that I can
report? There are two commits in the repo, so I guess 0.2 is the correct
value here, but I hadn't added `-p` to autorelease in the first commit.

https://pagure.io/python-neurotune/commits/main

$ fedpkg mockbuild
sources file doesn't exist. Source files download skipped.

setting SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=163728
Wrote: 
/home/asinha/Documents/02_Code/00_mine/fedora-new-packages/python-neurotune/python-neurotune-0.2.3-0.1.2029gita17f0fd.fc36.src.rpm
INFO: mock.py version 2.14 starting (python version = 3.10.0, NVR = 
mock-2.14-1.fc35)...
Start(bootstrap): init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish(bootstrap): init plugins
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish: init plugins
INFO: Signal handler active
Start: run
ERROR: Cannot find/open srpm: 
/home/asinha/Documents/02_Code/00_mine/fedora-new-packages/python-neurotune/python-neurotune-0.2.3-0.2.2029gita17f0fd.fc36.src.rpm.
 Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 
'/home/asinha/Documents/02_Code/00_mine/fedora-new-packages/python-neurotune/python-neurotune-0.2.3-0.2.2029gita17f0fd.fc36.src.rpm'
Could not execute mockbuild: Failed to execute command.

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?

2021-11-19 Thread Ahmed Almeleh

I do see your point though

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021, 12:12 Neal Gompa,  wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:05 AM Ahmed Almeleh
>  wrote:
> >
> > I do think voting for packages to be included in the next Fedora release
> is an amazing idea maybe we could create a survey through Google forms or
> make a  custom website for Fedora. I.e. Telling users select all packages
> you would like to see in Fedora 36.
> >
>
> It's a horrible idea, because it will just lead to disappointed users.
> Nothing compels anyone to do anything about that, so people who fill
> them out and see no results would just get angry at us.
>
>
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: A way to request/vote for packages to add next to Fedora Linux?