On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:10:39AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net wrote:
Well, no, not if there's an easy way to find the existing stuff. Is
there a way to extract this info from Bugzilla? I'd stick that query in
my bookmarks and
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 04:54:18PM +0200, Farkas Levente wrote:
now as ppc was removed from primary arch i try to build gstreamer-java
as a noarch packages. until now it was not possible because of this jdk
bug on ppc:
imho it's a bug and all buildhost should have to replaced to x86 x86_64
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 02:40:07AM -0600, Eric Smith wrote:
sufficient. Is there any way I can obtain a copy of the rescomp
executable built on the koji server to run under gdb on my own system?
You could print a base64 or hexadecimal representation of the binary in
the build logs, download
though.
I will do that change in F14 packages. Till Maas asked me for this
change also in F13, but I am a little hesitant to do this as I am afraid
of regressions. Do you think this change could break things in F13?
It'll temporarily break libguestfs, but a simple rebuild will fix
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:10:59PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
The log of the following update shows that it was submitted five times,
I assume with newer packages each time:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-6.git20100408.fc12,ModemManager-0.3-9.git20100409.fc12
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Peter Czanik wrote:
Version 3.0 also added SSL support among many other changes, but that
can't be enabled on openSUSE (configure arg: --disable-ssl): syslog-ng
is in /sbin, openssl libs are in /usr/lib, linking from /usr is not
allowed in /, and SSL
On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 08:53:10PM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Anyway, when it comes to the update, I'm happy to help. The total number
of downstream packages dependent on twisted is 33. Should we expect
breakage? Were there any API changes in twisted?
I think we could start by dividing the
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:37:33AM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:21, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
8. The package updated sucessfully, but was not used intentionally. No
breakage noticed
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:13:18PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
Even
if an update is there to fix something, it does not mean that one can or
will test it completely (special hardware might be required). In this
case it is still interesting to know, whether it installs
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 07:15:30PM +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Unfortunately our ticketing tool doesn't do a great job at this, as we
can't take one ticket and mark multiple release branches it affects
and which of those release branches the fix
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:09:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 14:56 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
e.g. using a flag for each supported release or some Whiteboard
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 02:20:57PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
As a user, having been hit by a bug, CLOSED UPSTREAM is nothing but a
cheap bold lie packagers use as weak excuse to for not being able to fix
a bug having hit a user.
In other words: FIXED UPSTREAM does not fix anything for
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 03:49:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
1. I have tried this update in my regular day-to-day use and seen no
regressions.
2. I have tried this update in my regular day-to-day use and seen a
regression: bug #XX.
3. (Where the update claims to fix bug #XX)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:04:51AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2010/3/26 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net:
Does anyone else see anything odd about this update?
I didn't know that maniadrive shares code with php...
AFAICT, it doesn't. This update looks
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 02:16:14PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2010/3/26 Till Maas opensou...@till.name:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:04:51AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2010/3/26 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net:
Does anyone else see anything odd about
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:55:19PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Inform_Upstream
I sometimes forget as well and not surprised there would be instances
where upstream is not informed.
You added the section about informing
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 08:46:45PM +0100, nodata wrote:
I use a German keyboard on all of my machines. Once or twice a year a
bug comes along in Fedora that breaks that and I'm stuck with an
American keyboard and system-config-keyboard to change it back again.
I use a German keyboard, too,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:36:10AM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
if you need assistance, I'm happy to support you.
Sadly, I'm not approved, yet, this could get a bit tricky.
Next weekend is a Fedora Action Day in my region, I am sure I will get
to sponsor you then.
Regards
Till
Hiyas,
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 04:45:25PM +0800, Chen Lei wrote:
The privoxy current in F12 is a beta version and had a lot of bugs.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?component=privoxyproduct=Fedora
Can anyone tell Karsten to fix those bugs?
I did not check any further, but did
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
Ok if they are from the same login session and same UID it is reasonable
to expect them to share /tmp.
Iirc, it would be more FHS compliant to use /var/tmp instead.
Regards
Till
pgp70p2xBXwfN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:34:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Sat, 20.03.10 10:34, Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) wrote:
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
Ok if they are from the same login session and same UID it is reasonable
to expect them
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 07:38:43AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
These requirements render the karma automatism useless for all branches
except F13, because the fedora-packager package in F12 was iirc pushed
automatically after it received enough testing. If this implies
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:21:47PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Alexander Boström wrote:
ons 2010-03-10 klockan 15:57 -0600 skrev Eric Sandeen:
There has been a lot of work upstream on 4k sector support, and in general
yes, we are ready.
Problems can probably be expected in case the
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:22:56PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:34:59AM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
I am also pretty sure that a BIOS does not consider the partition table
to boot,
I can vouch for at least 2 Intel based motherboards which do
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 01:04:29PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 21:55 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
how about using GPT[0] partitions for F14 for all installations that wipe
the whole disk to install Fedora? It is also considered to be good by
Tejun Heo[1] and it seems
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:56:10AM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
We are currently working to verify that storage devices work properly
report
the information that they want us to use (doing this with several storage
providers and have also raised this with EMC/VMware).
If we see real world
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:25:38AM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
I should have asked - do you have the details captured in bugzilla? If so,
that
will be useful to help kick off the discussion with them.
It seemed to be common knowledge already, but I just created a bug
report:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 07:54:09PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Yes!
Hopefully BIOS support won't be a problem because of gptsync. Can we
also get gptsync packaged separately, instead of having an odd version
bundled with Anaconda ...
A first incomplete Feature page is available here:
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:36:59AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths, this
inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages have
to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release order.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:32:35AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
I wrote:
Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths,
this inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages
have to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release
Hiyas,
there is a -1 karma comment claiming that libpng is broken, because the
new x86_64 package conflicts with the old i686 package:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libpng-1.2.43-1.fc12
| file /usr/share/man/man5/png.5.gz from install of
| libpng-2:1.2.43-1.fc12.i686 conflicts with
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:05:29PM +, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 18/03/10 13:27, Till Maas wrote:
Hiyas,
there is a -1 karma comment claiming that libpng is broken, because the
new x86_64 package conflicts with the old i686 package:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libpng
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 03:57:14PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Mike Chambers wrote:
Hadn't seen this discussed yet (not really a big hardware geek), and
just saw an article about this today. Are we (linux as a whole) ready
for this or getting ready, or already using it? And If we bought a
Hi,
how about using GPT[0] partitions for F14 for all installations that wipe
the whole disk to install Fedora? It is also considered to be good by
Tejun Heo[1] and it seems to work nicely already on F12. I just
partitioned a new HD using gdisk and the kernel seems to recognise it
without any
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:53:15PM +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
On 3/18/2010 9:47 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:
The default pseudo-geometry will still be 63 sectors/track unless you
change it, and by default a partition's start-of-data is forced to the
beginning of a track. Making the sectors
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:32:48PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
me bdisk, which uses modern GPT partition tables, that do not care about
^
*sigh* This is meant to be gdisk.
Regards
Till
pgp0Dg1isND4s.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 06:49:41PM +, Branched Report wrote:
fedora-easy-karma-0-0.3.20100306git00fc20aa.fc12.noarch requires
fedora-packager = 0:0.4.0
This is unexpected behaviour of Fedora for me. Why is the package from
F12 automatically added to the F13 repo? The current
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 07:32:06PM +0100, Gergely Buday wrote:
is there a list of known deficiencies of fedora - I mean those which
can be cured by developing new software, rather than fixing bugs? Or,
if such list does not exist, can you name a few missing item from
fedora? Think of
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:19:56PM +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Trying a yum update gives me this. Broken update?
Transaction Check Error:
file /usr/lib64/gstreamer-0.10/libgstshapewipe.so from install of
gstreamer-plugins-good-0.10.21-1.fc12.x86_64 conflicts with file from
package
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 01:45:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
There are so many developers around on this list that know: reporting
bugs is the right way to get problems fixed and fixing things is way
better than posting workarounds to public places for various reasons --
nevertheless
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 07:09:59PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Nikolay Ulyanitsky wrote:
There are a lot of generally useful macros in Fedora, which are not
described in the Fedora wiki: %__awk, %__bzip2, %__cat, %__chgrp,
%__chmod, %__chown, %__cp, %__cpio, %__file, %__gpg, %__grep,
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 07:55:55AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 12:25 +0200, Debarshi Ray wrote:
I would like to transfer ownership of the gajim package to Michal
Schmidt (michich). I am a bit wary of PackageDB transferring not
letting me select the new owner. Could
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 04:51:34PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
The biggest query command I would like at the moment is something like:
fedora-easy-karma --list # lists packages to be voted on.
fedora-easy-karma --list-new # list pacakges I haven't voted on already.
fedora-easy-karma
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 08:33:16PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
On 2010/03/10 20:19 (GMT-0500) Ric Wheeler composed:
And power consumption will go down as you won't need as many platters :-)
Not materially for those whose needs are already down to less than one
platter. MultiGHz, Multicore
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:20:11AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/11/2010 02:14 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Can you leave bodhi feedback with an FAS account if you haven't signed a
CLA? (The thing about FAS accounts I am not crazy about is the CLA. What
about using a bugzilla account
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:22:35PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Additionally, I have some RFE's too. ;)
- Could you add a 'q' for quit or something. Or at least not catch
control-c? If I am in the middle of doing something and need to
reboot or wander off, I would perfer to be able to just
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:51:52PM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
You need to update packages from updates-testing first and then it's
useful to run it. Please look at the wiki for example output.
Would your script break, say, if he was using the bodhi-client from
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 06:47:00AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:07:39AM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 20:25 -0500 schrieb Seth Vidal:
I agree, there was obviously a divisive and destructive aspect to that
meeting.
Jonathan, Do you
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:29:28AM +0100, Milos Jakubicek wrote:
Also thanks for packaging that immediately -- what about installing it
by default? It's a tiny package and we really do want our users to
provide feedback.
I do not mind, if it is installed by default, but I am not sure,
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:22:37AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 13:08 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Afaics this does not affect some minor issue, but a fundamental reason
why package maintainer decided to become Fedora package maintainers.
No volunteer package maintainer
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 09:34:15AM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
1) Comments could allow for multi-line code. I tried to paste stuff in
and well skipped a couple of packages from the paste :)
Do you have any wish about how this should behave? I was thinking that
e.g. a comment like EOF
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 11:11:30AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 16:10:40 -0700, Kevin wrote:
- Proposed Updates Policy Change - mjg59
So, I'm willing to sacrifice a pawn. If that proposal, in particular the
| Before being added to updates, the package
| must
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 10:09:17AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:07 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:14:38AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:27 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 07:50:43AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Given the obvious utility of this script, can we get it added to the
fedora-packager package? It doesn't make a lot of sense to have
developers downloading a script off a wiki to use this.
It's (going to be) in the
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 12:34:03PM -0500, Will Woods wrote:
Adam's poll results are valid *only* for Fedora users who:
a) Are members of the Fedora forum,
b) Enthusiasts/power-users to the degree that they would notice a new
threads/poll within a day of its posting, and
c) Hold a strong
Good news everyone,
you can probably expect to receive more positive bodhi karma for your
updates in the future (or you already got unexpected much), because
there is now a script called 'fedora-easy-karma'[0], that makes
providing feedback a lot easier.
This makes it more important to consider
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:19:27AM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 06/03/10 10:04, Till Maas wrote:
--snipped--
DB)
3) once a day a crawler reads all files and counts for each package how
often they are installed,
What about uninstalled?
Update bring in upd to X, but package Y,Z
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Regards
Till
pgpdxHb1B1LoX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:14:38AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:27 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs created prior to
adding F13 to RedHat Bugzilla or the branching of F13, depending on
what happened later, are touched
Good news everyone,
you can probably expect to receive more positive bodhi karma for your
updates in the future (or you already got unexpected much), because
there is now a script called 'fedora-easy-karma'[0], that makes
providing feedback a lot easier.
This makes it more important to consider
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:16:45PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar naheemzaf...@gmail.com:
[snipped]
PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
there are many users
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:48:23AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
deal with the problems that might arise with the new version. But if the
new version is dumped upon me in the middle of a week, I'm left without
a choice. I have to immediately deal with whatever problems arise from
the upgrade.
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:28:32AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:52:56AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
One size does still not fit all, although this is a great idea for
most packages in Fedora for packages in certain niches this is a bad idea.
I've said this before (and got 0 response), I believe there should
be some divide made
Here is now a review request for fedora-easy-karma:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570771
pgp3bH9mzb8w2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:53:54PM -0500, TK009 wrote:
I hope everyone is well. With the worst of the “snowpocalypse behind us
(here in the Northern Hemisphere) and the branching of Fedora 13, there
is a bit of ‘spring cleaning’ the the bugzappers need to do. This
e-mail is designed to
Hi,
I have some ideas to speedup the availability of updates. Are there any
reasons except that the tools to do this do not exist yet, to switch to
this? I created a wiki page for this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Till/update_availability_speedup_ideas
The basic idea is to create new
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:08:09AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
I have some ideas to speedup the availability of updates. Are there any
reasons except that the tools to do this do not exist yet, to switch to
this? I created a wiki page
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:11:23PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs created prior to
adding F13 to RedHat Bugzilla or the branching of F13, depending on
what happened later, are touched by the Rawhide bug rebase
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
Also a link to an example spec would be helpful.
For just the #VCS key? Let me instead write up a formal proposal:
It helps to have something
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:42:57PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:11:23PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs created prior to
adding F13 to RedHat Bugzilla or the branching of F13, depending on
what
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 10:21:37PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
With defaults (no command-line args), it here prompted me to enter
the FAS password for localhost. I had to use --fas-username=...
These are the two commands that are used to get the username, what do
they return for you?
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:49:09PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) said:
It seems to be missing something - it says 'all rpms that are not included
in the prior metadata will be deleted', but there's nothing in that
proposal
as written that will cause
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 01:46:34PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
Ah. You're looking at it on a kind of micro level; 'how can I tell this
package has been tested?'
For a package maintainer it is especially interesting, whether the own
update has been tested.
Maybe it makes it clearer if I
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:36:53PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
small nit: if a single update has, say, three packages in it, the script
presents it for your feedback three times.
This is fixed in the current git release.
Regards
Till
pgp1JcxH9MT6j.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:34:20AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Where is the module 'fedora_cert' packaged? I can't seem to find it.
It is in fedora-packager-0.4.0-1.fc12 from updates-testing.
Regards
Till
pgp7Sganx4A6n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:59:16PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
But let's be clear. That's a *policy* decision. One of the things that
got very confusing in the previous thread(s) was the intermixing of
policy decisions and technical issues. For instance, Kevin's response
So, I'm going to
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:05:23PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 08:02 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Why? Because you say so? We aren't doing that stuff now and things are
working just fine, thank you very much! We don't HAVE to change anything at
all!
This I
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:07:29PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
functions aren't actually deprecated in F11.
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:46:20PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
What kind of tests need to be done always manually? The only ones I can
think are tests for the appearance of applications or tests that require
specific hardware. But in the general case, I
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:33:40AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
You keep saying that 7 days is enough but I haven't seen you provide
_any_ evidence to support it. Noting that it will often take 3-4 days
before a package in testing can be seen by all users. So maybe you are
So there is an easy
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 10:50:22AM -0600, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
On 3/3/2010 2:51, Till Maas wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:07:29PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
How about we keep updates and updates-testing more like they are and add
another repo like updates-stable that follows your
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 05:45:02PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 05:37:14PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
actually works (i.e. if it doesn't lead to maintainers only caring about
the
conservative stream).
Packagers would then have the choice, I think this can only be
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 11:07:27AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:42:57AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
Are there even any metrics about how many bad updates happened? For me
bug that can
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:04:21PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
As far as I understood, there is no need to backport security fixes. One
could just copy the package with the security fix with all needed
dependencies to the stable repo imho.
I think people are going
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:08:22PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
Bug avoiding regressions at all costs is what some are willing to take.
With the repo split there can be at least better co-operation as e.g.
splitting the distribution. At least for me as a FOSS believer getting
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 02:26:19PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
Upstream reports a logging bug. You claim to know better and WONTFIX
because obviously you have more experience in the legalities of running
tor nodes and the police then upstream does..
What is the big problem with the
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 02:06:33PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 17:04 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
I mind have misunderstood it, but afaics it only says that it will be
tested, because it spent time in updates-testing, but this is not even
true nowadays, even if packages
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:55:46AM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
So here is a first ugly script to easily give feedback for all installed
testing updates that were created after a certain date (I did not find
an easy way to get all testing updates, one did not yet comment on):
http
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 03:57:06PM +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
see bug footer - This is autogenerated bugzilla, I'm sorry if the problem is
already fixed or reported. Additionally I apologize if that directory
ownership
was requested earlier by some bugzilla (some directories were
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:30:18PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Will Woods wrote:
So I think it would be shortsighted for FESCo to refuse to even discuss
a policy about what manual testing is currently required, since any plan
for improving the quality of the
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 09:09:08PM +0100, Alexander Boström wrote:
mån 2010-03-01 klockan 20:13 +0100 skrev Till Maas:
But I wonder, how do you access CVS without this?
You shouldn't need it. What happens if you don't have it?
It still seems to work. :-)
CVS records the root location
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:52:53AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 01:36 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
, those users have very few choices
And, again, you are wrong.
Rawhide and Debian unstable are both the obvious choices, Gentoo is
still used by some I think. A little
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 03:54:02PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
b. Given a, I would say people should stop posting to this thread. If
you have a better updates policy in mind, perhaps you could draft up a
proposal for what you think it should be? Or wait for a real proposal
to comment on?
Since
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 03:00:39PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Friday 26 February 2010, Till Maas wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:12:53PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Also repoquery returns F12 results but accepts --releasever
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 09:44:11AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Adams wrote:
IMHO you're developing the wrong distro. It is statements like yours
that contribute to the Fedora is a rolling beta
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 10:45:49AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Till Maas wrote:
Did you read what he wrote? I feel tempted to just copy the paragraph
Kevin wrote again, because it already answers your question: Rawhide is
not partly rolling as Fedora is.
And a typical
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 08:43:58PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
I like it more to have bugs fixed
in F(current) at the cost of not fixing that much bugs in F(current-1)
to keep it stable.
This should read as to have more bugs fixed in F(current) (even at the
cost of maybe introduce regressions
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 05:05:54PM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
About rawhide: rawhide could/should contain more experimental stuff,
such as beta releases or cvs snapshots of actively and frequently
developed software.
Such a repo would be nice, but it won't work for Rawhide as it is,
because
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:05:38PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
$releasever just changes the variable, so the URLs are all the same ...
just with different variables. Specifically:
mirrorlist=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-$releaseverarch=$basearch
...is never going
801 - 900 of 967 matches
Mail list logo
