Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2016-05-20 16:00 UTC'
Links to all tickets below c
Hey guys,
I'm working with Jan & Honza on the RHEL side of the house. Currently we're
slated to keep yum as the primary name/command for package management in RHEL.
It may or may not be backed by dnf at some point; we're still looking at the
pros & cons and how to bring better compatibility if
Hi folks! We've got quite a lot of outstanding blockers for Fedora 24
Final which are going to need dealing with, so here's a roundup. If
you're CC'ed on this mail and you're in a hurry, search for your
name/nick and you'll probably find the bits you need to look at.
tl;dr summary
-
Q
On 19/05/16 21:26, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:42 AM, John Florian wrote:
From: Alec Leamas [mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 09:39
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default
reposdir
I
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:42 AM, John Florian wrote:
>> From: Alec Leamas [mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 09:39
>> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Subject: Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default
>> reposdir
>>
>>
>>
>> On 19/05/16 15:16,
On Thu, 19 May 2016 11:15:02 +0200
Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> Since I heard several requests about that, I will try to enable EPEL 7
> (in staging for now). If it goes well then we can think about
> enabling EPEL 6 or Fedora branches too.
ok. Thanks. There are many fewer epel7 packages than Fedo
> From: Alec Leamas [mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 09:39
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default
> reposdir
>
>
>
> On 19/05/16 15:16, John Florian wrote:
> >> From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwak.
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Failed openQA tests: 28/72 (x86_64), 5/17 (i386)
ID: 18155 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/18155
ID: 18157 Test:
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 6/60 (x86_64), 2/15 (i386)
ID: 18245 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org
On 05/18/2016 09:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 15:02 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:10:57AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2016-05-13 at 15:19 +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:
+1
The Change Page did not even try to weight pros and cons. IMHO con
OLD: Fedora-24-20160518.n.0
NEW: Fedora-24-20160519.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 24
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:5
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0.00 B
Size of dropped packages:8.45 MiB
Size of
On 19/05/16 15:16, John Florian wrote:
From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwak...@fedoraproject.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 15:15
Another +1 here. There are plenty of software vendors (e.g. Google and
Adobe, to name two people might have heard of) that provide the option of
installing their
> From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwak...@fedoraproject.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 15:15
>
> Another +1 here. There are plenty of software vendors (e.g. Google and
> Adobe, to name two people might have heard of) that provide the option of
> installing their software via an RPM, which inst
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1337559
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 19 May 2016 at 08:47, Avram Lubkin wrote:
> I'd suggest running pylint against the packages and skipping anything below
> a certain threshold. There are currently over 80,000 packages on PyPi and
> the vast majority are poorly written.
>
That isn't why he is doing this. I don't think he is loo
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160518.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160519.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:6
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 7
Dropped packages:5
Upgraded packages: 75
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 4.53 MiB
Size of dropped packages:8.45
I'd suggest running pylint against the packages and skipping anything below
a certain threshold. There are currently over 80,000 packages on PyPi and
the vast majority are poorly written.
I think a more worthwhile effort would be to use the PyPi package rankings (
http://pypi-ranking.info/alltime)
On Thu, 19 May 2016 09:21:06 -
"Raphael Groner" wrote:
> What's wrong with pdf-stapler? I see only a bug about outdated
> version ¹ and an issue with FAS in review ². Maybe the maintainer is
> unresponsive.
from F-24 compose report
[pdf-stapler]
pdf-stapler-0.3.3-6.fc24.noarch requi
What's wrong with pdf-stapler? I see only a bug about outdated version ¹ and an
issue with FAS in review ². Maybe the maintainer is unresponsive.
¹ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306792
² https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210#c45
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedor
Please request ACL in PkgDB ¹ and I'll approve. Thanks!
¹ https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-SecretStorage/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 05/19/2016 12:40 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2016 05:03:51 +0200
> Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
>> Last week Koschei [1] was updated to latest upstream release (1.6.1).
>> The new version comes with one particularly interesting feature -
>> Koschei is now able to track more than one pack
On 18 May 2016 at 22:01, wrote:
> The following packages have broken dependencies and will be retired
> on 2016-05-31 (Final Freeze for Fedora 24) unless someone fixes them. If
> you
> know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a
> proper reason:
> https://fedoraproje
Dne 19.5.2016 v 10:47 Mikolaj Izdebski napsal(a):
> On 05/18/2016 10:40 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Could you please enable CI for ruby? Or actually the ruby-rails group
>> for every Fedora branch?
> It doesn't work this way. Once new targets are added to Koschei, all
> packages will be monitored t
On 05/18/2016 08:37 PM, Raphael Groner wrote:
> +1 branched/alpha (could help with upcoming mass rebuild issues)
Mass rebuilds are done in rawhide, before branching.
--
Mikolaj Izdebski
Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedo
On 05/18/2016 10:40 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Could you please enable CI for ruby? Or actually the ruby-rails group
> for every Fedora branch?
It doesn't work this way. Once new targets are added to Koschei, all
packages will be monitored there. It's all or nothing.
--
Mikolaj Izdebski
Software E
Do I understand correctly that you build just the latest version of each
package?
Vít
Dne 19.5.2016 v 08:51 Miroslav Suchy napsal(a):
> Hi,
> I just finished packaging of 15 634 python3-* packages for Fedora.
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/copr/PyPI3/
> You can click on Builds
26 matches
Mail list logo
