Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 8:52 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > The e-mail address reaches nowhere
>
> or actually, does it still work? Have you tried it? I assume that the fact
> that the Bugzilla account was disabled means he has left Red Hat and hence
> the @redhat.com e-mail address has also become invalid, but I might be
> mistaken.
>

That is what that means.



-- 
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

Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> The e-mail address reaches nowhere

or actually, does it still work? Have you tried it? I assume that the fact 
that the Bugzilla account was disabled means he has left Red Hat and hence 
the @redhat.com e-mail address has also become invalid, but I might be 
mistaken.

Kevin Kofler
___
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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Can we change the defaults for PA inside bugzilla to Wim and transfer
> the open tickets to him?

Just invoke the fast-track nonresponsive maintainer policy. The e-mail 
address reaches nowhere and Lennart has not requested reassigning the 
packages to a personal account, so he seems to be undisputedly 
nonresponsive.

Kevin Kofler
___
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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Maxwell G via devel]

On Saturday, July 2, 2022 3:11:44 PM CDT Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 11:54:17AM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 2, 2022 10:01:18 AM CDT Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > This is an extremely common problem in Fedora: the de facto maintainer
> > > is not the main admin, and so the bugs are assigned to the wrong
> > > person. Ideally we would automatically orphan a package if the main
> > > admin does not have any commits to the package for a certain period of
> > > time, e.g. three years.
> > 
> > It would help if other people besides the main admin could change the
> > Bugzilla assignee. After all, if the main admin is non-responsive, it's
> > going to be difficult to get them to do it.
> 
> I'm not sure the main admin matters as much as this thread indicates?
> All the other maintainers of the package are CC'ed, in this case
> belegdol.

Maybe the main admin isn't so important, but the Bugzilla assignee is. 
Packages should be assigned to the person who is actually maintaining it. This 
makes it so bugs are more likely to be addressed. Then, the bugs will also 
show up in the "Open bugs assigned to me" link on the Bugzilla homepage[1] for 
the actual maintainer. This is more important for EPEL than Fedora proper. For 
packagers who don't care about EPEL, EPEL bugs should be assigned to the co-
maintainer (or the epel-packagers-sig) who actually maintains the EPEL 
branches; the latter should be held responsible to fix bugs and be the one who 
is NEEDINFO'd (when/if that happens), not the Fedora maintainer. It seems like 
there is at least some agreement in this area[2].

[1]: To be fair, I'm not sure how many people actually look at this. At least 
I do.
[2]: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10866

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
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 2103389] New: Please branch and build perl-Monitoring-Plugin in epel9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103389

Bug ID: 2103389
   Summary: Please branch and build perl-Monitoring-Plugin in
epel9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Monitoring-Plugin
  Assignee: piotr1...@gmail.com
  Reporter: li...@cmadams.net
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
piotr1...@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Please branch and build perl-Monitoring-Plugin in epel9.

If you do not wish to maintain perl-Monitoring-Plugin in epel9,
or do not think you will be able to do this in a timely manner,
I would be happy to be a co-maintainer of the package (FAS cmadams);
please add me through
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Monitoring-Plugin/adduser


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103389
___
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

Looking for 2 review swaps

[Robert-André Mauchin]

Hi,

I'm looking to get review of these two packages:

#2103380 NEW- nob...@fedoraproject.org - Review Request: rust-cradle - Execute child 
processes with ease https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103380


which depends on:

#2103367 NEW- nob...@fedoraproject.org - Review Request: rust-gag - Redirect, or 
hold stdout/stderr output https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103367


Can do anything in exchange.

Best regards,

Robert-André
___
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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 11:54:17AM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote:
> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 10:01:18 AM CDT Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> 
> > This is an extremely common problem in Fedora: the de facto maintainer
> > is not the main admin, and so the bugs are assigned to the wrong
> > person. Ideally we would automatically orphan a package if the main
> > admin does not have any commits to the package for a certain period of
> > time, e.g. three years.
> 
> It would help if other people besides the main admin could change the 
> Bugzilla 
> assignee. After all, if the main admin is non-responsive, it's going to be 
> difficult to get them to do it.

I'm not sure the main admin matters as much as this thread indicates?
All the other maintainers of the package are CC'ed, in this case
belegdol.
> 
> > To avoid being removed you could simply push an
> > empty commit.
> 
> The problem with empty commits is that they cause a release bump when 
> rpmautospec is used which probably isn't desired. I guess this isn't the end 
> of the world.
> 
> There are also some packages which legitimately haven't been updated upstream 
> in three years. 

This has been discussed a number of times in the past, most recently the
discussion caused a policy to remove inactive provenpackagers. 

In any case I don't think setting needinfo on someone who is not working
on your bug will help much. Most likely they would ignore the needinfo
as well or show up and tell you they don't have cycles to work on the
bug and clear it. 

More effective would likely be refiling upstream and seeing if they
could address it. all IMHO. 

kevin


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: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 02/07/2022 18:27, Ben Cotton wrote:

This proposal has been withdrawn by the owners.


Why? Very useful feature.

--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.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

[Bug 2103378] New: perl-Socket-2.035 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103378

Bug ID: 2103378
   Summary: perl-Socket-2.035 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Socket
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 2.035
Upstream release that is considered latest: 2.035
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.034-1.fc37
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Socket/

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/3321/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Socket


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103378
___
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

Re: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Ralf Corsépius]

Am 02.07.22 um 18:27 schrieb Ben Cotton:



On Fri, Jul 1, 2022, 1:54 PM Ben Cotton > wrote:


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Linux_Firmware_Minimization



This proposal has been withdrawn by the owners.


Any explanation why?

Ralf
___
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 2103369] New: perl-Math-BigInt-1.999837 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103369

Bug ID: 2103369
   Summary: perl-Math-BigInt-1.999837 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Math-BigInt
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 1.999837
Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.999837
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.9998.36-1.fc37
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Math-BigInt/

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/7954/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Math-BigInt


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103369
___
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

Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Maxwell G via devel]

On Saturday, July 2, 2022 10:01:18 AM CDT Michael Catanzaro wrote:

> This is an extremely common problem in Fedora: the de facto maintainer
> is not the main admin, and so the bugs are assigned to the wrong
> person. Ideally we would automatically orphan a package if the main
> admin does not have any commits to the package for a certain period of
> time, e.g. three years.

It would help if other people besides the main admin could change the Bugzilla 
assignee. After all, if the main admin is non-responsive, it's going to be 
difficult to get them to do it.

> To avoid being removed you could simply push an
> empty commit.

The problem with empty commits is that they cause a release bump when 
rpmautospec is used which probably isn't desired. I guess this isn't the end 
of the world.

There are also some packages which legitimately haven't been updated upstream 
in three years. 

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
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: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 12:29 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2022, 1:54 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Linux_Firmware_Minimization
>
>
> This proposal has been withdrawn by the owners.

All my hopes and dreams dashed with this statement. :(


-- 
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

Re: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Ben Cotton]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2022, 1:54 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Linux_Firmware_Minimization


This proposal has been withdrawn by the owners.
___
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 2103364] New: please build perl-Image-ExifTool for EPEL9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103364

Bug ID: 2103364
   Summary: please build perl-Image-ExifTool for EPEL9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Image-ExifTool
  Assignee: spo...@gmail.com
  Reporter: ser...@serjux.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Description of problem:

we need perl-Image-ExifTool, to complete all dependencies on debhelper ->
dh-autoreconf -> cdbs  

I'd like co maintain this package as well, to maintain all dependencies of
debian tools , my fas username is sergiomb 


Thank you


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103364
___
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

Fedora-Rawhide-20220702.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Minimal raw-xz armhfp

Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
9 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** 
below

Failed openQA tests: 58/236 (x86_64), 17/165 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220701.n.0):

ID: 1313615 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313615
ID: 1313634 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313634
ID: 1313671 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso clocks
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313671
ID: 1313685 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_package_install_remove@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313685
ID: 1313687 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313687
ID: 1313689 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_reboot_unmount@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313689
ID: 1313690 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_system_logging@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313690
ID: 1313691 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313691
ID: 1313692 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313692
ID: 1313693 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313693
ID: 1313694 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_update_cli@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313694
ID: 1313712 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313712
ID: 1313725 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_nfs_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313725
ID: 1313761 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313761
ID: 1313810 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313810
ID: 1313823 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313823
ID: 1313827 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_printing_builtin@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313827
ID: 1313829 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade clocks@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313829
ID: 1313878 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313878
ID: 1313906 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313906
ID: 1313922 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313922
ID: 1313959 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313959
ID: 1313960 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313960
ID: 1313961 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313961
ID: 1313962 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313962
ID: 1313963 Test: x86_64 universal install_sata@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313963
ID: 1313964 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313964
ID: 1313965 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313965
ID: 1313966 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313966
ID: 1313967 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_standard_partition_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313967
ID: 1313968 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_encrypted@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313968
ID: 1313970 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313970
ID: 1313971 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_free_space@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313971
ID: 1313972 Test: x86_64 universal install_software_raid@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313972
ID: 1313973 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi_empty@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313973
ID: 1313992 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313992
ID: 1314001 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_blivet_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: 

Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Sat, Jul 2 2022 at 12:35:44 PM +0200, Marius Schwarz 
 wrote:
Can we change the defaults for PA inside bugzilla to Wim and transfer 
the open tickets to him?
 it does not make sense to have Leonard as default assignee if the 
accoutn is disabled.


This is an extremely common problem in Fedora: the de facto maintainer 
is not the main admin, and so the bugs are assigned to the wrong 
person. Ideally we would automatically orphan a package if the main 
admin does not have any commits to the package for a certain period of 
time, e.g. three years. To avoid being removed you could simply push an 
empty commit.


Michael

___
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: Do we need a change proposal for this?

[Ben Beasley]

Since [1] was approved, I think you would not need a Change proposal as long as 
dropping i686 truly would not impact other packages.

If anything depends on any of the packages you want to change, then you would 
need to figure out the full dependency tree and work in from the leaves, 
convincing those maintainers to drop i686 before doing so yourself.

If there are dependent packages and it isn’t possible to get them to drop i686 
first, that’s when you would need a Change proposal; [2] is an example of that.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_i686_JDKs

On Sat, Jul 2, 2022, at 4:48 AM, Bob Mauchin wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> So, I and some Go fellows would like to drop i686 from Go supported 
> arches (not for go itself but the libraries and binaries we build with 
> it).
>
> Since technically Fedora isn't proposing the i686 variant to download 
> anymore, does it make sense to need a change proposal? No-one would 
> technically be impacted, except us who wouldn't have to deal with int 
> overflows. 
>
> If possible we'd like to kick this into action before our mass rebuild.
>
> Best regards, 
>
> Robert-André
> ___
> 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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Tom Hughes via devel]

On 02/07/2022 11:35, Marius Schwarz wrote:


Am 02.07.22 um 10:37 schrieb Adam Williamson:


Probably not, no. Lennart hasn't maintained PA upstream or downstream
for a long time. The current downstream maintainer is Wim Taymans (I
think).


Can we change the defaults for PA inside bugzilla to Wim and transfer 
the open tickets to him?
it does not make sense to have Leonard as default assignee if the 
accoutn is disabled.


Well that is just a matter of who is the main-admin of the package
so the package owner can change it.

Strictly speaking Lennart is still the main-admin on pulseaudio
though Wim is also a committer so would have been cced on the bug
if it was a pulseaudio bug.

But it isn't a pulseaudio bug, it's a pavucontrol bug, and Wim is
not a committer there which is why he isn't cced.

Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Marius Schwarz]

Hi,

Am 02.07.22 um 10:37 schrieb Adam Williamson:


Probably not, no. Lennart hasn't maintained PA upstream or downstream
for a long time. The current downstream maintainer is Wim Taymans (I
think).



Can we change the defaults for PA inside bugzilla to Wim and transfer 
the open tickets to him?
it does not make sense to have Leonard as default assignee if the 
accoutn is disabled.


Best regards,
Marius

___
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: F37 Change Proposal: Unfiltered Flathub (System-Wide Change)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:

> On 01/07/2022 20:32, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> I'd love to see a way to generate Flatpaks directly from our build system
>> without an intermediate step.
> 
> +1. Flatpaks should be built natively on our trusted infra from standard
> Flatpak manifests.

While we agree on almost all points, in this case I disagree in so much as I 
think Fedora should not be in a business of building Flatpaks at all, 
neither from RPMs, nor directly. The Flatpak technology has just too many 
drawbacks compared to good old RPMs. And the Fedora Flatpaks project is 
essentially unmaintained, or the required fedmod tool would not have been 
retired months ago (and not unretired since).

Kevin Kofler
___
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: F37 Change Proposal: Unfiltered Flathub (System-Wide Change)

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 01/07/2022 20:32, Matthew Miller wrote:

I'd love to see a way to generate Flatpaks directly from our build system
without an intermediate step.


+1. Flatpaks should be built natively on our trusted infra from standard 
Flatpak manifests.


--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.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: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 01/07/2022 19:54, Ben Cotton wrote:

Split linux-firmware into more subpackages, and add the ability to
automatically install firmware based on the hardware present


+1. Finally. Thanks for implementing this.

--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.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

Fedora-Cloud-35-20220702.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220701.0):

ID: 1313546 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_package_install_remove
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313546

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220701.0):

ID: 1313544 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313544
ID: 1313557 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313557

Passed openQA tests: 6/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
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

Do we need a change proposal for this?

[Bob Mauchin]

Hello everyone,

So, I and some Go fellows would like to drop i686 from Go supported arches
(not for go itself but the libraries and binaries we build with it).

Since technically Fedora isn't proposing the i686 variant to download
anymore, does it make sense to need a change proposal? No-one would
technically be impacted, except us who wouldn't have to deal with int
overflows.

If possible we'd like to kick this into action before our mass rebuild.

Best regards,

Robert-André
___
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: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2022-07-02 at 00:15 +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have some bug reports for PA opening BZ and only one ever got a response.
> 
> Is it possible that this is the cause:
> 
> You can't ask /Lennart Poettering / because that 
> account is disabled.
> 
> I tried a needinfo request after a month long silence.

Probably not, no. Lennart hasn't maintained PA upstream or downstream
for a long time. The current downstream maintainer is Wim Taymans (I
think).

Note that Fedora doesn't use Pulseaudio by default any more since F34,
it uses pipewire:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DefaultPipeWire
-- 
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

Fedora-Cloud-36-20220702.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-36-20220701.0):

ID: 1313528 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313528
ID: 1313541 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1313541

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
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: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 01. 07. 22 v 19:54 Ben Cotton napsal(a):

== Detailed Description ==
The `linux-firmware` RPM is very large (175M src.rpm, 287M
*.noarch.rpm per 20211027-126) that bundles most of the system
firmware loaded by the kernel, regardless of whether it’s actually
needed. Some additional firmwares are already split up into individual
subpackages. This change would extend that, splitting out most firmare
into appropriate subpackages. The Change would also make the
subpackages `Supplements` the appropriate `modalias(...)` for the
hardware they support and `Provides`
`firmware(kmodname/firmwarefile.bin)`


Wow, I wanted this for loong time. Thank you for doing this.


A DNF plugin will be written to make use of the `Supplements` metadata
to automatically install the appropriate firmware packages based on
the hardware present on the system (see openSUSE's `libzypp`:
https://github.com/openSUSE/libzypp/blob/a34d857dbe3b16d4a7e0219cd213cc5a87966538/zypp/target/modalias/Modalias.cc
and 
https://github.com/openSUSE/libzypp/blob/7f345ea4892fd02345e8de47c2a08ab5b174650b/doc/autoinclude/Modalias.doc)


Can this be paired with simple command line tool which will "just" print the appropriate packages? It would  be usefull 
in e.g., creating Ansible playbooks for the machine.


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