On 01/22/2015 07:15 PM, Haïkel wrote:
> 2015-01-21 11:49 GMT+01:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos :
>>
>> Step 6: ... If the proposed package is not reviewed for 2 months, the
>> package must be reviewed by the submitter, and a git module with the
>> master branch will be approved.
>>
>
> I share your con
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:41:53AM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> I agree on the systemd-filesystem side of things, the binaries sounds
> like it would be better described as systemd-utils with a provides for
> -units.
This could be a good idea, but I think that having an additional
name would caus
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 03:06:32AM +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 9:43:02 AM Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 21.01.15 12:21, Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
> > > l
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 03:42:47AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.01.15 12:21, Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
> > libraries. Packages which carry systemd units currently have to depend on
> >
>> > Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
>> > libraries. Packages which carry systemd units currently have to depend
>> > on
>> > systemd (through %post, %preun, %postun macros used to install and
>> > uninstall
>> > systemd units), which grows the dependency tree
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
> Radek Holy wrote:
>
> [...]
>>
>> What actually do you want?
>>
>> I'm really interested in what users expect when they use "installonly"
>> packages in any command except "install" and "remove". I strongly believe
>> that
>> there is a group
On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 9:43:02 AM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 21.01.15 12:21, Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
> > libraries. Packages which carry systemd units currently have to depend on
> > systemd (
On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 4:45:32 AM Björn Persson wrote:
> Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> >* #1381 Nonresponsive maintainer: odysseus (dgilmore, 18:17:42)
> > * AGREED: he is awol and his packages should be orphaned per the
> >process (7+, 0-) (dgilmore, 18:23:43)
>
> Fedora is less patient than Pen
On Wed, 21.01.15 12:21, Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
> libraries. Packages which carry systemd units currently have to depend on
> systemd (through %post, %preun, %postun macros used to install and uninstall
2015-01-21 11:49 GMT+01:00 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos :
>
> Step 6: ... If the proposed package is not reviewed for 2 months, the
> package must be reviewed by the submitter, and a git module with the
> master branch will be approved.
>
I share your concern about the pending list but self-review is n
Excerpts from Haïkel's message of 2015-01-23 11:46 +10:00:
> FYI, Prosody needs to be ported to Lua 5.2 (and we're updating to 5.3).
> It will either require patching Prosody and some dependencies or provide
> lua compatibility packages.
We already have Lua 5.1 compat packages for Prosody in F21+,
FYI, Prosody needs to be ported to Lua 5.2 (and we're updating to 5.3).
It will either require patching Prosody and some dependencies or provide
lua compatibility packages.
H.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of
Excerpts from Johan Cwiklinski's message of 2015-01-17 03:39 +10:00:
> I've orphaned lua-sec, lua-dbi and prosody packages.
>
> Feel free to take ownership of those ones.
Jan, I see that you are a comaintainer of prosody already and have
helped with updates before. Would you be willing to take t
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
>
> + gnome-calendar btw gnome-2048 on review already
>
>
> FWIW this one is not complete; maybe it will be ready for GNOME 3.16, but I
> would expect it to be included in GNOME 3.1
On Qui, 2015-01-22 at 13:31 -0700, Jerry James wrote:
> I don't know for sure, but I suspect the new version of mock that was
> just pushed out in F-21 updates broke fedora-review. At least,
> fedora-review is now broken, and I don't see any other recent updates
> that seem likely to be the cause
On 01/22/2015 03:17 PM, John Florian wrote:
> If I read this page[1] correctly, python3-pyparted should be available
> starting with F20, yet…
>
>
> Did I miss something?
Looks like apps doesn't quite handle subpackages correctly. So while pyparted
is in F20, that version doesn't provide pytho
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 13:40 +0100, Jan Zelený wrote:
> On 21. 1. 2015 at 11:07:31, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > > > > 1) DNF will be the default package manager for F22 [2], so
> > > > > everything is
> > > > > ok here.
> > > >
> > > > I really wonder what is the state here. This is on my rawhide:
>
If I read this page[1] correctly, python3-pyparted should be available starting
with F20, yet...
sudo yum install python3-pyparted
Loaded plugins: langpacks, list-data
No package python3-pyparted available.
Error: Nothing to do
Did I miss something?
[1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/p
Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>* #1381 Nonresponsive maintainer: odysseus (dgilmore, 18:17:42)
> * AGREED: he is awol and his packages should be orphaned per the
>process (7+, 0-) (dgilmore, 18:23:43)
Fedora is less patient than Penelope was. :-)
--
Björn Persson
pgpXH5OxrBANS.pgp
Description:
I don't know for sure, but I suspect the new version of mock that was
just pushed out in F-21 updates broke fedora-review. At least,
fedora-review is now broken, and I don't see any other recent updates
that seem likely to be the cause of the problem. Here's what happens
when I try to use fedora-
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 11:09 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 10:21 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > == Scope ==
> > * Proposal Owners: Initial work has been done in for Vagrant on F20
> > in a Copr repository.
>
> I'm really really interested in vagrant on fedora. I am
On 22.01.2015 18:50, Jerry James wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi,
I've got sflphone (SIP/IAX2 compatible softphone) up for review at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180698
Not high priority, but a nice to have. Happy to review in exchange.
I just
Am 22.01.2015 um 18:11 schrieb drago01:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 22.01.2015 um 17:59 schrieb drago01:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.01.2015 um 23:55 schrieb Yanko Kaneti:
When did Fedora become the place which only welcomes m
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Net-Twitter:
5fd19d414d3530fd3a9294cad906da0f Net-Twitter-4.01008.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 10:21 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal Owners: Initial work has been done in for Vagrant on F20
> in a Copr repository.
I'm really really interested in vagrant on fedora. I am however running
F21. The copr is only for F20. Any chance one can be creat
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've got sflphone (SIP/IAX2 compatible softphone) up for review at
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180698
>
> Not high priority, but a nice to have. Happy to review in exchange.
I just sent email about a list of packag
When I iniatially submitted GAP and some of its packages as Fedora
packages, I followed what Debian was doing at the time. I think we
can do a few things a little better now. One way is to stop
translating the GAP package names into human readable form, and just
use the upstream names. Rather th
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> How exactly is Fedora Atomic generated? It seems that fedpra-cloud-atomic.ks
> has no %packages section...
> I can find out how we're doing with Atomic assuming I know how it's
> constructed :)
It uses rpm-ostree; the input manifest
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 11:30 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > Penalize in what sense?
> > In the sense, that in addition to packaging something new you have to
> > review something else in order to get your new package in. If reviewing
> > is voluntary it should affect every packager the same, n
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 22.01.2015 um 17:59 schrieb drago01:
>> This is just a game
>
> keep your insults for yourself
> maybe for you it is just a game
That was not an insult, but was referring to the software in question,
gnome-2048 - which is indeed a ga
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 22.01.2015 um 17:59 schrieb drago01:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 21.01.2015 um 23:55 schrieb Yanko Kaneti:
When did Fedora become the place which only welcomes mature software?
>>>
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 09:57 -0500, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > > That's good for you, but unacceptable to me. That way we penalize people
> > > who add packages.
> > Penalize in what sense?
>
> In the sense, that in addition to packaging something new you have to
> review something else in order t
Am 22.01.2015 um 17:59 schrieb drago01:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.01.2015 um 23:55 schrieb Yanko Kaneti:
When did Fedora become the place which only welcomes mature software?
IMHO what you seem to aspire to is somewhat in conflict with the
release early, rele
- Original Message -
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:31:12AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > Yeah, as I've noted in the sum-up mail, it's clear that we won't be
> > able to switch server (and possibly workstation) completely, although
> > I'm quite sure we will be able to switch the minimal
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 21.01.2015 um 23:55 schrieb Yanko Kaneti:
>>
>> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 12:26 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Igor Gnatenko <
>>> i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
+ gnome-calendar
b
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:31:12AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Yeah, as I've noted in the sum-up mail, it's clear that we won't be
> able to switch server (and possibly workstation) completely, although
> I'm quite sure we will be able to switch the minimal cloud image to
> python3 only (again,
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 04:18:15PM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote:
> No problem, IIRC every package can declare itself protected by
> dropping a file into /etc/dnf/protected.d/
A good example of DNF developers listening to user concerns and
adjusting plans, by the way.
> wrong with discussions on devel@
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:56:23PM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > I am confident that we will have everything ready at the right
> > time. The way I read it, the change deadline is about testability
> > and general availability of the feature - that's ok for us. At that
> > point we will be ready
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:13:51PM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > The onus in Fedora has _ALWAYS_ been to prove that the new feature is
> > complete and ready to replace the existing working solution, not for
> > everyone else to prove that it's not.
> I'm not so sure about that. Off the top of my he
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 17:00 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 21.1.2015 v 17:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
> > On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:13:24 +0100
> > Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 11:02 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > >> I am using mock for Fedora development with DNF enabled by def
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:00:44 +0100
Jan Zelený wrote:
> -- snip --
> > > I have a notion, that after branching of Fedora 22 I will change
> > > /etc/mock/fedora-rawhide-*.cfg
> > > to use DNF by default. I.e. everything build for Fedora 23 would
> >
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015, at 08:22 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > since the "Python 3 as a Default" change [1] has been accepted a while ago
> > and is scheduled for F22, I'd like to share with you the status.
> >
> > The proposed change [1] mentions several
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 04:37:22PM +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> > > > And there is nothing wrong with review swaps. You help others,
> > > > they help you.
> > > That's good for you, but unacceptable to me. That way we penalize people
> > > who add packages.
> > Penalize in what sense?
On 20. 1. 2015 at 08:40:30, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015, at 06:27 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > You are probably right, I might have misunderstood what you actually
> > propose. Does it mean that you actually don't require this part to be
> > implemented at all and you can go with what'
-- snip --
> > I have a notion, that after branching of Fedora 22 I will change
> > /etc/mock/fedora-rawhide-*.cfg
> > to use DNF by default. I.e. everything build for Fedora 23 would use
> > DNF for building.
>
> This is not really true. Koji write out its own mock configs and will
> not be usi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 21.1.2015 v 17:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:13:24 +0100
> Mathieu Bridon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 11:02 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> Dne 21.1.2015 v 10:35 Peter Robinson napsal(a):
> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 a
Hello,
> Tunir is a self contained CI Continuous Integration [1] which will be used to
> test Fedora Cloud images nightly.
What relationship, if any, does this have with Taskotron?
Do I understand correctly that this Change does not involve / require setting
up automated test runs by rel-eng or F
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 15:08 +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:49 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Unfortunately review swaps don't work for new packagers, before they are
> > sponsored. They are encouraged to do informal reviews, but those reviews
> > don't carry
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 09:57 -0500, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > That's wishful thinking. I proposed that rule in order to make apparent
> > the fact that there are not enough reviewers and new packages are
> > blocked in the queue. Ignoring the fact isn't going to make it go away.
> True, there are n
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 04:04:37PM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 22/01/15 15:17, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:49 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >>> Unfortunately review swaps don
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Vagrant =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Vagrant
Change owner(s): Josef Stribny
Provide Vagrant http://www.vagrantup.com/ with the libvirt provider
as a default.
== Detailed Description ==
Vagrant is an automation tool used to manage development enviro
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 03:15:48PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> I just spoke with two members of DNF team about default usage of DNF in mock.
> I would like to share outcomes of this
> meeting.
>
> First I would like to state that you can already optionally use DNF in your
> mock by setting:
>
Hi all,
my name is Vojtech Trefny and I am from the Czech Republic. I have been
using Linux and OSS for nearly ten years now. I spent most of this time
in Ubuntu community doing non-development work (localisation,
documentation, advocacy...), but I switched to Fedora in 2013, joined
Red Hat l
On 22/01/15 15:17, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
>> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:49 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>>> Unfortunately review swaps don't work for new packagers, before they are
>>> sponsored. They are encou
> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 12:10 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > I'd like to propose an amendment to allow
> > > bringing packages even if no reviewers are available (the typical case).
> > >
> > > Step 6: ... If the proposed package is not reviewed for 2 months, the
> > > package must be reviewed by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:15:48 +0100
Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> I just spoke with two members of DNF team about default usage of DNF
> in mock. I would like to share outcomes of this meeting.
>
> First I would like to state that you can already optionall
> Please add this copr
> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/whot/kcm_touchpad/
>
> Please review this branch:
> https://github.com/whot/kcm_touchpad/tree/wip/libinput-support
Thanks for taking on this additional work.
Mirek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.f
On 22. 1. 2015 at 15:06:34, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:33:31 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 20.1.2015 v 14:22 Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
> > > 1) DNF will be the default package manager for F22 [2], so everything is
> > > ok here.>
> > I really wonder what is the state her
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:49 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Unfortunately review swaps don't work for new packagers, before they are
> > sponsored. They are encouraged to do informal reviews, but those reviews
> > don't
I just spoke with two members of DNF team about default usage of DNF in mock. I
would like to share outcomes of this
meeting.
First I would like to state that you can already optionally use DNF in your
mock by setting:
config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf'
in your
/etc/mock/site-defaults.cf
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Eike Rathke wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On Wednesday, 2015-01-21 11:35:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>
>>> > I plan to upgrade libicu to 54.1 in rawhide
>>>
>>> Will you be doing this in a side tag and then
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Eike Rathke wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Wednesday, 2015-01-21 11:35:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>> > I plan to upgrade libicu to 54.1 in rawhide
>>
>> Will you be doing this in a side tag and then getting rel-eng to tag
>> the resulting builds in like most bump
On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:49 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Unfortunately review swaps don't work for new packagers, before they are
> sponsored. They are encouraged to do informal reviews, but those reviews
> don't carry formal weight. I propose to change this, and allow non-sponsored
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:33:31 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 20.1.2015 v 14:22 Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
> > 1) DNF will be the default package manager for F22 [2], so everything is ok
> > here.
>
> I really wonder what is the state here. This is on my rawhide:
> # dnf remove yum
> python3-c
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:10:19PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 21.1.2015 v 11:49 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a):
> > I'd like to propose an amendment to allow
> > bringing packages even if no reviewers are available (the typical case).
> >
> > Step 6: ... If the proposed package is not revie
Pete Zaitcev writes:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 11:22:57 +0100
> Marcel Oliver wrote:
>
> > Are these considered bugs that I should file against the package? Is
> > there a policy that applies?
>
> I think you should file. I had in the past made maintainers of gvim
> (vim-X11) and evince tak
Hi Peter,
On Wednesday, 2015-01-21 11:35:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > I plan to upgrade libicu to 54.1 in rawhide
>
> Will you be doing this in a side tag and then getting rel-eng to tag
> the resulting builds in like most bumps (see ruby 2.2 thread from
> earlier this week as an example)
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 19:25:40 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
> I installed kernel* from updates-testing. Now I want to go back to
> distro-sync.
> Let's try it:
> sudo dnf distro-sync kernel*
> Error: problem with installed package kernel-3.17.7-300.local.fc21.x86_64.
> problem with installed packag
Radek Holy wrote:
[...]
>
> What actually do you want?
>
> I'm really interested in what users expect when they use "installonly"
> packages in any command except "install" and "remove". I strongly believe that
> there is a group of users that expect that "downgrade kernel" simply installs
> an
On 21/01/15 22:15, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 21/01/15 11:49, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>
>> I don't have a solution to bring extra resources to reviewing (which
>> will be the ideal), but I'd like to propose an amendment to allow
>> bringing packages even if no reviewers are available (the t
On 22/01/15 10:03, Radek Holy wrote:
What actually do you want?
I'm really interested in what users expect when they use "installonly" packages in any command except
"install" and "remove". I strongly believe that there is a group of users that expect that
"downgrade kernel" simply installs a
- Original Message -
> From: "Neal Becker"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 1:25:40 AM
> Subject: another dnf problem
>
> I installed kernel* from updates-testing. Now I want to go back to
> distro-sync.
> Let's try it:
> sudo dnf distro-sync kernel*
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:16:47PM +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 12:10 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > And there is nothing wrong with review swaps. You help others, they help
> > you.
>
> That's good for you, but unacceptable to me. That way we penalize people
> who
On 22.01.2015 02:04, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"DM" == Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski writes:
DM> I meant each new release of freefem++. The build process tries to
DM> download sources for many external libraries and patches some of
DM> them, so you have to work around it.
Hmm. I looked at
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
> I installed kernel* from updates-testing. Now I want to go back to
> distro-sync.
> Let's try it:
> sudo dnf distro-sync kernel*
> Error: problem with installed package kernel-3.17.7-300.local.fc21.x86_64.
> problem with installed package ker
75 matches
Mail list logo
