On Sun, 2025-01-26 at 10:40 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think
> anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be built more
> or less immediately. Yes, even changes without an immediate functional
> impact like
On Sun, 2025-01-26 at 10:40 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Anything still on the list when the
> mass-rebuild is ready to start should be skipped and the bug should be
> marked as a blocker for Beta (to make sure it gets looked at).
Your regular reminder that this is not what the blocker proces
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 9:40 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 26. 01. 25 v 16:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
>> On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
>> > com
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:12 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 27. 01. 25 v 15:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 9:40 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>>
>> Dne 26. 01. 25 v 16:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok
>> wrote:
Dne 27. 01. 25 v 15:58 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 9:40 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26. 01. 25 v 16:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok
wrote:
On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Note
Dne 26. 01. 25 v 16:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or r
On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 at 13:26, Björn Persson wrote:
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> > > It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't
> think anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be
> built more
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 10:40:09AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think
> anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be built more
> or less immediately. Yes, even changes without an immediate functional
> imp
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 6:26 PM Björn Persson wrote:
> If I correct a typo in a comment, I should bump the release and cause
> churn on build servers and mirrors, even though nothing at all changes
> in the binary package?
I do worry about server/storage usage, but in
my more innocent years I ha
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 7:26 PM Björn Persson wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > > It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think
> > > anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be b
Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think
> > anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be built more
> > or less immediately. Yes, even changes without an imme
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>
>> On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
>> > commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> > commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide,
> > for whatever reason. Sometimes a package is*built*,
On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide,
for whatever reason. Sometimes a package is*built*, but gated from
Rawhide by automated tests, but then the mass rebui
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:13:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:32:52PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:13 PM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> > > commit
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:32:52PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:13 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> > commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide,
> > for whatever reason. S
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:13 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide,
> for whatever reason. Sometimes a package is *built*, but gated from
> Rawhide by automated tests, b
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 12:16:39PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-01-24 at 12:02 -0600, Michel Lind wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:07:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> > > of libnfs. libnfs 6 was i
On Fri, 2025-01-24 at 15:21 -0500, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>
> On 1/24/25 14:46, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:57:57PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
> > ...snip...
> > >
> > > Sorry, thanks. I forgot to note that ELN h
On 1/24/25 14:46, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:57:57PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
...snip...
Sorry, thanks. I forgot to note that ELN has a different %{dist} tag
structure than Fedora. We include a "buildroot number" i
On Fri, 2025-01-24 at 12:02 -0600, Michel Lind wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:07:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> > of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> > Rawhide (there were some atte
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:57:57PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
...snip...
>
> Sorry, thanks. I forgot to note that ELN has a different %{dist} tag
> structure than Fedora. We include a "buildroot number" in the %{dist} which
> we bump before
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:07:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> Rawhide (there were some attempts in side tags, but they all seem to
> have been garbage co
On Fri, 2025-01-24 at 02:41 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:07:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> > of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> > Rawhide (there were so
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:07:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> Rawhide (there were some attempts in side tags, but they all seem to
> have been garbage co
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 09:45 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:08 PM Adam Williamson <
> adamw...@fedoraproject.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> > > of
On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 09:45 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:08 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> > of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> > Rawhide (there were some at
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:08 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
> of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
> Rawhide (there were some attempts in side tags, but they all seem to
> have been garbage collected)
Much like libtest, the mass rebuild has inadvertently bumped the soname
of libnfs. libnfs 6 was in dist-git but had never been built for
Rawhide (there were some attempts in side tags, but they all seem to
have been garbage collected). The mass rebuild built it, so now libnfs
has gone from 5.x to 6
29 matches
Mail list logo
