Sorry for the delay in getting back.
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 20:05 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
I updated it to mention the ticket handling.
I just wonder, is there no verification done one the request, e.g. is
everybody allowed to request a build override or is it restricted to
package
On 02/17/2010 03:16 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 05:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Am I correct in assuming, wcorresponding mock setups for and yum
mirrorlists reflecting this new setup will be in place in time when
these repos go on-line?
yes. MirrorManager should
On 03/03/2010 05:17 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 03:34 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Where is the mock update?
It's been nearly 2 weeks since you've promissed to do so, but this
hasn't happened.
There still are no mock configurations providing setups for fedora-13
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Yet another perfect example of an update which should have been pushed
directly to stable.
No, it's an example of an update that should have been pushed to
updates-testing sooner...
--
Jeff Ollie
--
devel mailing
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 07:36:09AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
We don't really have a coverage list, but most of the people who have
been doing tagging are all in the US time zones, so anything outside of
that is welcome.
Ok.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Buildroot_override_SOP is the
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:30:31AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
If every grouped update did that, Koji would be littered with special tags.
* problems with merging from the special tags (what if dist-f12-kde440 and
dist-f12-someotherlib123 both carry their own rebuilds of, say, compiz? It
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 12:59 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
I volunteer to help with buildroot overrides assuming that it does not
take that much time. I am located in CET/UTC+1, too. Is there maybe a
schedule about how well the timeslots are covered?
Great!
We don't really have a coverage list, but
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 18:22 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
If the ticket is assigned to a single person, I doubt we can do the
overwrites in a timely manner. Remember, I'm wasn't talking about a
single overwrite but about large build chains that require 8 or 9 rounds
of builds and up to 15
On 17/02/10 04:31, Jesse Keating wrote:
--snipped--
There will be a Rawhide Report and a Branched Report. Rawhide will be
F-14 now, Branched is F-13. There will also be Fedora 13 Updates
Testing announcements over on the test list.
When will there be a branched.repo config for testers.
Am Dienstag, den 16.02.2010, 20:31 -0800 schrieb Jesse Keating:
static-repos will act as it normally does for a released Fedora. The
repo seen is what is in the buildroot, which is what is tagged for
release, and anything we've tagged override to make it available in
the buildroot for
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:04:13 +0100 Christoph Wickert wrote:
This means that chainbuilds are no longer possible and this slows
development down dramatically. Think of a feature like Xfce 4.8 with
it's tight schedule [1]. E.g. we only have 8 days to build one of the
pre-releases.
When I made
Am Mittwoch, den 17.02.2010, 10:34 +0100 schrieb Michal Schmidt:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:04:13 +0100 Christoph Wickert wrote:
This means that chainbuilds are no longer possible and this slows
development down dramatically. Think of a feature like Xfce 4.8 with
it's tight schedule [1]. E.g.
Am Mittwoch, den 17.02.2010, 12:18 +0100 schrieb Till Maas:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:44:10AM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
And what about the updates that don't have a custom tag?
If the update is big enough, that a lot of packages require a rebuild,
using a custom tag seems to be the
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:23:22PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Both approaches have their ups and downs, but both slow down
development:
* Asking rel-eng for overwrites takes time.
* Asking rel-eng for a tag takes some time too. And I'm afraid
that with an
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 08:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
When will there be a branched.repo config for testers.
So they won't be getting rawhide.repo.
It that's what they want\need.
The branched repo config is the fedora.repo file. Mirrormanager will be
making sure that goes to the right
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 10:04 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
How do we address this issue?
The same way we address it for updates to a stable Fedora.
Release Engineering is an open group, if there are significant delays in
getting tagging done we can certainly try to get more taggers into the
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 10:34 +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote:
Would it help to use a special Koji tag for this?
Let's say you'd get a tag 'dist-f13-xfce48' where all packages built
there would be immediately available for building dependend packages.
And then when you're done, you'd ask rel-eng to
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 05:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Am I correct in assuming, wcorresponding mock setups for and yum
mirrorlists reflecting this new setup will be in place in time when
these repos go on-line?
yes. MirrorManager should already be working for these repos, I'll be
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 15:28 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Right, now there no longer is early branching for selected packages onn
demand but a general early branches for all packages.
Except it's not really early. We're now in bugfix/polish mode for
Fedora 13, not in rapid development
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:11, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 08:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
When will there be a branched.repo config for testers.
So they won't be getting rawhide.repo.
It that's what they want\need.
The branched repo config is the
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 10:04 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
This means that large updates like Gnome, KDE or Xfce will get massively
delayed after alpha. They might not make it into one of the prereleases,
which means they get less testing. A lot of features will no longer be
possible in
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 08:10:17PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
That's right folks, we are now branched for Fedora 13. What does this
mean to you? Well that depends on who you are, here are some yous
that we wrote about:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_frozen_rawhide_announce_plan#Use_Cases
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Is the branch freeze a week late or is it now the same as the alpha
freeze? In the Important Release Milestones wiki page[0], the branch
was scheduled for 2010-02-09, but on the F13 Schedule[1], the Alpha
Freeze links to the Alpha Freeze
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:11:58AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
The branched repo config is the fedora.repo file. Mirrormanager will be
making sure that goes to the right place. There is an updated
Is this http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/ the url for
mirrormanager? I have
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 07:36:00AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
Is the branch freeze a week late or is it now the same as the alpha
freeze? In the Important Release Milestones wiki page[0], the branch
was scheduled for 2010-02-09, but on
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:40:33PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:11:58AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
The branched repo config is the fedora.repo file. Mirrormanager will be
making sure that goes to the right place. There is an updated
Is this
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:52:57AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:40:33PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:11:58AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
The branched repo config is the fedora.repo file. Mirrormanager will be
making sure that goes to the
Jesse Keating wrote:
There is one small wrinkle. I've broken the dist-rawhide static repo,
because I've made dist-rawhide a real build target to be used by builds
from devel/. I'll be making a symlink soon that will keep
dist-rawhide static repos pointed to the right location.
Why not use
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:40:15PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Yes, I know, because I co-maintain a package using qt and I recently
read something from the maintainer that he can not push a bugfix update
to stable, because a qt override is in the buildroot.
The solution there is to talk to
Sven Lankes wrote:
I'm assuming that Till is talking about my comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549717#c2 on merkaartor
(which he co-maintains).
So nothing to see here - please move on. This is about not being able to
do a scratch build of an svn-snapshot of merkaartor.
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 01:32 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
This only works for things developed in Fedora or for projects like
Gnome, because we are closely following their schedule. Other projects
have other schedules and we need to be flexible. I really like no frozen
rawhide, but IMO we
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:24:45AM +0100, Sven Lankes wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:40:15PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Yes, I know, because I co-maintain a package using qt and I recently
read something from the maintainer that he can not push a bugfix update
to stable, because a qt
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:40:15PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:28:37PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Take KDE for example: Although the KDE SIG is doing a great job in
avoiding breakdowns, I doubt that each and every maintainer of a QT or
Till Maas wrote:
I'll remember this. But why don't you use a special tag for this instead
of a buildroot override? I believe this question is not answered and I
even might have asked it once in IRC. ;-)
Because, as has been said earlier in this thread, special tags also have
their problems:
*
Jesse Keating wrote:
You're in Austria right?
Yes. But my wake times tend to be very chaotic. ;-)
Rex wakes up before I do, which is why he's hitting them before me.
Finding somebody on the other side of the pond who's interested in doing
releng work would help.
Right, having somebody
That's right folks, we are now branched for Fedora 13. What does this
mean to you? Well that depends on who you are, here are some yous
that we wrote about:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_frozen_rawhide_announce_plan#Use_Cases
The real take away here is explained at
Jesse Keating wrote, at 02/17/2010 01:10 PM +9:00:
That's right folks, we are now branched for Fedora 13. What does this
mean to you? Well that depends on who you are, here are some yous
that we wrote about:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_frozen_rawhide_announce_plan#Use_Cases
From me
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 13:27 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
A. How does this affect http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/ ?
static-repos will act as it normally does for a released Fedora. The
repo seen is what is in the buildroot, which is what is tagged for
release, and anything we've
On 02/17/2010 05:10 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
That's right folks, we are now branched for Fedora 13. What does this
mean to you? Well that depends on who you are, here are some yous
that we wrote about:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_frozen_rawhide_announce_plan#Use_Cases
The real take
39 matches
Mail list logo
