So it seems fltk has been blocked from F-21. This in and of itself is
fine but there's been no bugs filed against packages that built
against it, no announcement that I can see and the package itself
hasn't been retired in git, nor can I see a rel-eng ticket. Is this an
oversight?
Peter
--
devel
On Tue 18 Mar 2014 07:03:31 PM CET Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2014-03-18 15:31 GMT+01:00 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Optional Javadocs =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OptionalJavadocs
I suppose shipping API documentation for end-user applications
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 06:09:09PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 16:50 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
Is someone going to fix the TLS certificate?
https://register.flocktofedora.org is trying to use a certificate that
is only valid for rhcloud.com .
Hello,
Is there some policy for package maintainers and pkg-config? My issue
is that a package (libev) used pkg-config for some time, but later
dropped it (for legitimate reasons as upstream didn't like that).
However, should we really care about upstream in cases like that?
I was making a
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:38:27PM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
One benefit of posting it on devel@ rather than news@ is that people
notice it. I had never even heard of Fedora Magazine before.
I'm not surprised -- we have communications gaps across the whole project.
This effort is my small
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:12:34PM -0500, Mukundan Ragavan wrote:
I like the fact that info about Fedora magazine is posted here. While
I knew about Fedora magazine, I do not always remember to check it. It
would be very nice if links are also included. It would make it easier
to go to
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 08:31:06PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Reposting from http://fedoramagazine.org/?p=1231, for those of you who
prefer email to the web. :)
Perhaps these should be syndicated to Planet Fedora, for those of us
who don't mind the web? Actually, I swear I've seen
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:09:31PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
- Do we do this by default, because firewalld is the default firewall in
Fedora? I would not want to require firewalld though because fail2ban
can work perfectly fine without it, so it would be broken by default on
systems
What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next ?
The Workstation WG, looks like a Gnome only thing, will there be at place
of users of other DE's in Fedora.next ?
Best Regards
Tim
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next ?
They still exist.
The Workstation WG, looks like a Gnome only thing, will there be at place of
users of other DE's in Fedora.next ?
Workstation uses
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/2014 07:52 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next ?
The Workstation WG, looks like a Gnome only thing, will there be
at place of users of other DE's in Fedora.next ?
Fedora Products
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:52:07PM +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next ?
We had a big discussion about this last month. General consensus is that we
don't see spins going away, at least in the near future.
The Fedora products are intended to
On 03/19/2014 01:09 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
There is also a proposal for a Fedora Plasma product based around KDE. I'm
personally a little skeptical but listening -- I think want a technology
showcase masquerading as a product would miss the point, and I'd like to be
convinced that this is
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 01:29:24PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
KDE should be release blocking. It's strongly represented in Fedora,
both in terms of users and available developer resources. We should make
sure KDE is fully functional before rolling out a Fedora release.
Should this (the release
devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote on 03/18/2014 08:11:04:
From: mru...@matthias-runge.de
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Date: 03/18/2014 08:11
Subject: [HEADS UP] Update to Django-1.6
Sent by: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hey there,
now that we can have
On Tue, 18.03.14 21:39, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
Combining x-systemd.automount + noauto however is a way to establish a
mount point and only lazily triggering it on access. And that's what you
want to use here.
That does work. It's automounted on any command I threw
On Wed, 19.03.14 15:01, William Brown (will...@firstyear.id.au) wrote:
Why not also extend this to /boot also? It's rarely used in day to day
on a system, really only for yum updates that include a kernel.
[root@strawberry ~]# lsof | grep /boot
[root@strawberry ~]#
To establish the
Greetings!
This is a summary of FESCo's accepted Fedora 21 Changes for week 11
(2014-03-12 meeting).
Reminder: the Change Submission deadline for System Wide Change is due in less
than three weeks!
= System Wide Changes =
* cron to systemd time units
URL:
On 03/19/2014 01:35 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 01:29:24PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
KDE should be release blocking. It's strongly represented in Fedora,
both in terms of users and available developer resources. We should make
sure KDE is fully functional before rolling
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 02:27:45PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
I would like to see more focus in Fedora. And to me, having these 3 core
Products is a good way of doing that. Instead of saying that everything
in Fedora is equal, we would now say that these 3 products are the main
deliverable.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.comwrote:
fail2ban doesn't work out of the box with firewalld. However, we can
drop a config file at /etc/fail2ban/jail.d/fedora-firewalld.conf to
enable it.
Where is this configuration file available? I'd love to have a copy
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:05:40 +
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
So it seems fltk has been blocked from F-21. This in and of itself is
fine but there's been no bugs filed against packages that built
against it, no announcement that I can see and the package itself
hasn't been
On 03/19/2014 07:42 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com
mailto:or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
fail2ban doesn't work out of the box with firewalld. However, we can
drop a config file at /etc/fail2ban/jail.d/fedora-firewalld.conf to
On 18 March 2014 22:50, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Reposting from http://fedoramagazine.org/?p=1231, for those of you who
prefer email to the web. :)
Fedora is big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This new Fedora
Magazine feature will highlight interesting
I promised a while ago that I would provide a text version of my talk at
DevConf, for people who couldn't make it and because sitting through a video
of me standing up there going on and on doesn't really make for good
followup discussion.
Because it grew rather long, I think it works best as a
Quite a few people have asked me how the AppStream distro metadata is
actually generated for their package. Since F20 we're also doing
things like supply missing AppData files for some key apps, and
replacing some upstream screenshots on others. In order to make this
more transparent, I'm going to
On 03/19/2014 04:05 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
fltk has been blocked from F-21
Huh? What are you refering to? indeed there are no recent builds for 21
in the main koji (last one is from August)
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Przemek Klosowski
przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote:
On 03/19/2014 04:05 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
fltk has been blocked from F-21
Huh? What are you refering to? indeed there are no recent builds for 21 in
the main koji (last one is from August)
See Kevin's
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 07:34:41 -0400
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 08:31:06PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Reposting from http://fedoramagazine.org/?p=1231, for those of
you who prefer email to the web. :)
Perhaps these should be syndicated to
2014-03-19 11:30 GMT+01:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com:
Hello,
Is there some policy for package maintainers and pkg-config? My issue
is that a package (libev) used pkg-config for some time, but later
dropped it (for legitimate reasons as upstream didn't like that).
However,
2014-03-19 5:31 GMT+01:00 William Brown will...@firstyear.id.au:
On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 21:39 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: RFE: Do not
persistently mount EFI System partition at /boot/efi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077984
It's still better to remove the on-going writing of
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 03:01:27PM +1030, William Brown wrote:
On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 21:39 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
Fedora takes a different approach though, and will mount an explicit
boot partition to /boot and the ESP to /boot/efi, and do so
unconditionally without involving
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
* Other developers: Update Rails dependent packages to be working with Ruby
on
Rails 4.1
Looking at the repo, the only toplevel 'app' that this would appear to cover
would be OpenShift Origin, which is already called out on the feature page?
Bill
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at -MM-DD 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
NOTE: US is on DST, so it's an hour later for them than normal.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2014-03-20 10:00 Thu US/Pacific
On Mar 19, 2014, at 7:02 AM, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
It's one of the reasons why I really really dislike the invention of
/boot/efi as the mount point for the ESP…
I agree, although I go farther. The EFI System partition doesn't scale, isn't
resilient, can neither
Am 19.03.2014 20:14, schrieb Jonathan Underwood:
On 19 March 2014 15:10, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046816
You are going to need fail2ban-0.9-2 - f20 build is here
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6651548.
Am 19.03.2014 20:21, schrieb Jonathan Underwood:
On 19 March 2014 19:16, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
but with not take care of it you would end in having firewalld as mandatory
dependency which is the main point of that thread - there are still way
too much circular
On 19 March 2014 19:23, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 19.03.2014 20:21, schrieb Jonathan Underwood:
On 19 March 2014 19:16, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
but with not take care of it you would end in having firewalld as mandatory
dependency which is the main
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2014-03-19)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 18:00:02 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-03-19/fesco.2014-03-19-18.00.log.html
.
Meeting summary
On 19 March 2014 19:16, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 19.03.2014 20:14, schrieb Jonathan Underwood:
On 19 March 2014 15:10, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046816
You are going to need fail2ban-0.9-2 - f20 build is
On 19 March 2014 15:10, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote:
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046816
You are going to need fail2ban-0.9-2 - f20 build is here
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6651548. More testing
would be much appreciated.
On a
I think dynamically mounted /boot is a separate conversation. It's only
relevant here in that if x-systemd.automount,noauto behavior is desired for
/boot, then for sure that means we need a better way for the EFI System
partition because we can't have nested automounts.
As for resources, the
On 03/19/2014 05:38 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:09:31PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
- Stick it in a fail2ban-firewalld sub-package that requires firewalld.
Downside is that people need to figure out that they really should
install this for default installs. Upside
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 02:32:40PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
Hmm, I like this alternative a lot. I'm probably taking this too
far, but I'm thinking of:
fail2ban-server - core components with minimal deps
fail2ban-firewalld - firewalld support/configuration - requires firewalld
On Wed, 19.03.14 13:13, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
I agree, although I go farther. The EFI System partition doesn't
scale, isn't resilient, can neither be mirrored nor easily sync'd
(multidevice boot). It should be considered a pre-boot and OS
installer domain only.
You
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Lennart Poettering
mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
On Wed, 19.03.14 13:13, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
I agree, although I go farther. The EFI System partition doesn't
scale, isn't resilient, can neither be mirrored nor easily sync'd
(multidevice
- Original Message -
On 03/08/2014 03:37 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Sorry I am missing something. Why can't we keep the old pdftk that
works with itext2?
Check the whole thread - because of GCJ dependency. iText is second
On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 15:57 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Lennart Poettering
mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
On Wed, 19.03.14 13:13, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
I agree, although I go farther. The EFI System partition doesn't
scale, isn't
Hi
And JDK5 might be good enough for the use required. It doesn't claim
to be anything more than that, so I don't see the harm in leaving it
there.
We don't orphan or retire packages based on harm. We do it when there is
noone volunteering to maintain it. If you care about GCJ, step up
Ok using Jonathan's suggestion for the settings from a clean install I'm
getting an error whether I use the systemd backend or not...
2014-03-19 22:06:57,956 fail2ban.server.server[12698]: INFOChanged
logging target to /var/log/fail2ban.log for Fail2ban v0.9.0
2014-03-19 22:06:57,961
On Mar 19, 2014, at 4:53 PM, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
On Wed, 19.03.14 13:13, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
I agree, although I go farther. The EFI System partition doesn't
scale, isn't resilient, can neither be mirrored nor easily sync'd
(multidevice
On 03/19/2014 09:10 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
Ok using Jonathan's suggestion for the settings from a clean install I'm
getting an error whether I use the systemd backend or not...
[12698]: ERROR ipset
create fail2ban-sshd hash:ip timeout 600
firewall-cmd --direct --add-rule ipv4 filter INPUT
On 03/19/2014 02:56 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 02:32:40PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
Hmm, I like this alternative a lot. I'm probably taking this too
far, but I'm thinking of:
fail2ban-server - core components with minimal deps
fail2ban-firewalld - firewalld
On Mar 19, 2014, at 7:51 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 15:57 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
More complex than trying to mirror a FAT ESP partition across multiple
boot disks, keeping it properly synchronized, because RAID isn't
supported?
You can
Summary of changes:
0f48f4f... Initial import (perl-Test-API-0.004-2) (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Test-API-0.004-2.fc21' was created pointing to:
0f48f4f... Initial import (perl-Test-API-0.004-2)
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Folks, I just wanted to let you know that we released Beaker 0.16.0 this
week. This includes the fix for password hashing, which was one of the
outstanding security issues with having a public Beaker deployment.
57 matches
Mail list logo
