On 12/03/10 03:42, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Adams wrote:
There's a difference between not supporting third-party software (is
that actually documented somewhere or another Kevin Kofler rule?) and
intentionally breaking it.
There's no policy saying we support it, ergo by default, we don't.
On 03/12/2010 01:12 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 12.3.2010 02:24, Rahul Sundaram napsal(a):
I disagree. Imagining that we are living in a island where no software
exists outside the repository is just delusional and the assumption that
everyone has the bandwidth to deal with all that churn
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 20:12, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Why not handle those cases similar to how GNOME and Firefox (and IIRC
OpenOffice.org?) have been handled in the past, where a test/RC release
was in Fedora leading up to the Fedora release, and the final upstream
release is
Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com writes:
The point is: this update *does* work. The error message is non-fatal.
The software works. So what they claim is correct. What you claim is
also correct.
If the user/group saslauth is not needed by cyrus-sasl, why has it been
added in the first
On 03/11/2010 11:36 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
If a user has built an application against a library, it's not
especially reasonable to then break that application by bumping a soname
in a stable release.
If the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/11/2010 11:54 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Alexander Kahl wrote:
Please define massive if you're keeping exactly what's needed to keep
everything running and prune anything else by using a sophisticated,
tunable garbage collection mechanism.
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 someone please take care of it
or advise what I need to do about this?
I do not want to remain as a co-maintainer.
Thanks,
On 03/12/2010 04:36 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote:
And i disagree here. People like that have to face that Fedora or any
similar distro isn't for them.
I don't see why you want to continue pushing off users instead of
working out a method that satisfies more users. Breaking ABI stability
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/12/2010 04:36 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote:
And i disagree here. People like that have to face that Fedora or any
similar distro isn't for them.
I don't see why you want to continue pushing off users instead of
On 12/03/10 11:33, Thomas Janssen wrote:
-snipped--
If I can be indulged.
it's because i can't believe that dial-up-land user are really that
stubborn
It's not the endusers fault,
they have bad infracture.
and use Fedora
Because that is what they want.
(and even worse try to change it)
On 08/14/2009 10:20 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
It's been pretty common since forever for various scriptlets to redirect
output of stderr/stdout to /dev/null, so I think it'd be a bit of an
ugly mess if there was a mandatory packaging rule you couldn't use at
least
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/10 11:33, Thomas Janssen wrote:
-snipped--
If I can be indulged.
it's because i can't believe that dial-up-land user are really that
stubborn
It's not the endusers fault,
they have bad infracture.
Oh, so
On 12/03/10 11:56, Thomas Janssen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/10 11:33, Thomas Janssen wrote:
-snipped--
If I can be indulged.
it's because i can't believe that dial-up-land user are really that
stubborn
It's not the endusers
On 12/03/10 12:04, Frank Murphy wrote:
--snipped--
That is not, you are not intitled to voice your concerns,
s /That is not to say, you are not intitled to voice your concerns,
---snipped-
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded, Fedora 12, 13, Rawhide: x86_64
--
devel mailing
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/10 11:56, Thomas Janssen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/10 11:33, Thomas Janssen wrote:
-snipped--
If I can be indulged.
it's because i can't believe
On 03/12/2010 05:03 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote:
I wasn't answering the ABI stability part. But the people-in-dial-up-land
part.
It is interconnected in my argument and doesn't make sense to debate in
parts. If you avoid breaking ABI stability, you can avoid unnecessary
churn and one of the
On 03/12/10 00:45, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
If you are the user, then you should not be compiling software. :-) You
should be using some repository and that repository is responsible for
rebuilding the package.
I tend to agree with what you have been writing but this seems
On 12/03/10 12:12, Thomas Janssen wrote:
--sniped--
Oh, so it's our fault?
It's just life, in all it's forms.
Exactly. And if i live in an area where i cant have everything, i
can't choose everything.
Bringing it back to dialup.
Fedora liveCD 500-700mb
CentOS DVD 3.5GB app.
Fedora 1,
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/12/2010 05:03 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote:
I wasn't answering the ABI stability part. But the people-in-dial-up-land
part.
It is interconnected in my argument and doesn't make sense to debate in
parts. If you
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/03/10 12:12, Thomas Janssen wrote:
--sniped--
Oh, so it's our fault?
It's just life, in all it's forms.
Exactly. And if i live in an area where i cant have everything, i
can't choose everything.
Bringing it
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
You'd be looking at a typical peak of around 5 months between upstream
release and Fedora release, with an average of more like 2-3 months,
which is a lot different from the 6 months that keeps being repeated as
the waiting time for
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at writes:
If the application is in Fedora as all applications eventually ought to be,
we will take care of rebuilding it. Otherwise, whoever built it (some third-
party repository or the user him/herself) is responsible for rebuilding it.
This has always
On Thursday 11 March 2010 09:59:46 pm Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:56:05 -0500
Konstantin Ryabitsev i...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
(And if the answer is backport the security fixes to 1.8.1 then I'm
afraid I don't really have the skills nor have the time to spend on
such
- Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should
be
done. Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in
another round of discussions (not this meeting).
On Thursday 11 March 2010 07:36:34 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should be
done. Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in
another round of discussions (not this
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:23:58PM +, Andy Green wrote:
However I agree this isn't a real issue, the packages with the homegrown
apps should choke the yum update because they see the lib versions they
depend on would go away, so nothing breaks.
Only if they're using the packaging
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:23:58PM +, Andy Green wrote:
However I agree this isn't a real issue, the packages with the homegrown
apps should choke the yum update because they see the lib versions they
depend on would go away, so nothing
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 04:39:30AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
If the software is not maintained within Fedora, there's no notification
of soname bumps.
There is, soname bumps are supposed to be announced on this public list.
A list that is targetted at developers of
- Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Hi, Tom Tromey pointed me at your message
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/133039.html
Hi Ian.
I was curious what you are timing when you compare ld and gold. Is
that the total time that it takes to build the package,
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I should make people sit in a dial-up connection and have them
update software now and then to bring them back to the ground.
I don't see why we should cripple our distribution just to support
communication technologies from the 80s or 90s. It's 2010 now, those
On 03/12/2010 09:47 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
So is anyone going to submit a review of desktopcouch? I've been
messing with it for a personal project so I figured I'll at least get
the review done and get it into the repos. Long-term I'd appreciate
some co-maintainers...
I'll need it for
Frank Murphy wrote:
Should we ask the community, to change our community focus:
Fedora is a community of people, who come from well developed
lifestyles. Have access to high-speed internet, do not download,
or feel you belong unless this is satisfied.
I've been advocating for adding
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
It is interconnected in my argument and doesn't make sense to debate in
parts. If you avoid breaking ABI stability, you can avoid unnecessary
churn and one of the benefits ( think resource cost - infrastructure,
mirrors etc) of that is users with low bandwidth systems
Terry Barnaby wrote:
I really strongly disagree that ABI interfaces of the mainly used
shared libraries could be allowed to change in a stable release.
We develop internal applications that are packaged and go out to a few
users. We use Fedora primarily as an OS to run applications we need
Matthew Garrett wrote:
users do do things like download stuff and run ./configure; make; make
install
Why would we even try to support that? Packaging exists for a reason.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 03/12/2010 03:54 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/12/2010 08:24 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I should make people sit in a dial-up connection and have them
update software now and then to bring them back to the ground.
I don't see why we should cripple our distribution
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 16:07 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Fedora CURRENTLY does NOT provide
any ABI guarantees. There ARE ALREADY updates which change the ABI (you
recognize them as they are normally grouped with rebuilds of other stuff for
the bumped ABI). The people who want to change
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 04:13:17PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
users do do things like download stuff and run ./configure; make; make
install
Why would we even try to support that?
Because we don't package every piece of software in the world?
--
Matthew Garrett |
Andy Green wrote:
On 03/12/10 00:45, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
If you are the user, then you should not be compiling software. :-) You
should be using some repository and that repository is responsible for
rebuilding the package.
I tend to agree with what you have been
On 03/12/2010 10:19 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
So is anyone going to submit a review of desktopcouch? I've been
messing with it for a personal project so I figured I'll at least get
the review done and get it into the repos.
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Tom spot Callaway
tcall...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/12/2010 09:47 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
So is anyone going to submit a review of desktopcouch? I've been
messing with it for a personal project so I figured I'll at least get
the review done and get it into the
Andrew Haley wrote:
It's a disaster if you're relying on a third-party compiled program
for your Internet connectivity. Imagine it: one morning you update,
then the connection breaks, then you can't get to the Internet to find
out how to get things working again.
And why would we want to
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
I don't see why we should cripple our distribution just to support
communication technologies from the 80s or 90s. It's 2010 now, those
technologies are over 10 years out of date!
If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what
Andrew Haley wrote:
Because we don't despise our users. I don't, anyway.
If we don't despise our users, we shouldn't let them use crap like third-
party connectivity software which isn't even packaged properly. :-)
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I should make people sit in a dial-up connection and have them
update software now and then to bring them back to the ground.
I don't see why we should cripple our distribution just to support
communication technologies from the 80s or 90s. It's
Matthias Clasen wrote:
Stop shouting already. Those abi-changing updates are there because YOU
keep pushing them, making the lives of our users hard without any good
justification other than 'my way or the highway'. It is increasingly
becoming clear that no reasonable compromise is possible
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 08:48 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
When was F13 released? Oh, it wasn't, so it is just glorified Rawhide
still? And you complain about it being broken (especially in its
updates-*testing*)?
F-13 Branched is /not/ a glorified Rawhide. It's attitudes like that
which
On 03/12/2010 10:47 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
I really think this is not the approach, unless Fedora is just for rich people
in (theoretically) rich countries. I doubt that's what we want.
Or we could just make Fedora print money. ;)
~spot
P.S. Please don't try this.
--
devel mailing list
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 someone please take care of it
or advise what I need to do about
Compose started at Fri Mar 12 08:15:12 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
calibre-0.6.42-1.fc13.i686 requires libMagickCore.so.2
calibre-0.6.42-1.fc13.i686 requires libMagickWand.so.2
drawtiming-0.7.1-1.fc13.i686
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 09:58 +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
If the user/group saslauth is not needed by cyrus-sasl, why has it
been
added in the first place?
Packaging bug or some leftover, but it appears the user/group isn't used
for anything. So the package functions, but there are still
On 03/12/2010 08:46 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
This is extremely poor attitude Kevin and reeks of arrogance. Talking
down on users and contributors who don't have the privilege of high
bandwidth connections isn't what I expected from you. Nothing left to say.
Fedora had never been
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 10:49 +0530, Zubin Mithra wrote:
My name is Zubin Mithra and I am aspiring to get into GSoC on behalf
of Fedora. I wish to work on making a library for better iptables
management. Details can be viewed in the proposal which I have
attached along with the email.
I would
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
Hello,
Le 12/03/2010 17:26, Till Maas a écrit :
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
Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen
is that the infrastructure needs to improve, not that the whole
world adapts to stone-age infrastructure. Bandwidth is required
for many more
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com wrote:
I created testing repo [1] with two updated core modules
and updates repo with perl(core) packages.
I've tested this scenario:
1/ perl package with perl-Module-Build-0.3500-110.fc13 and
perl-version-0.77-110.fc13
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-Data-Dumper-Concise/F-13
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6094
Modified Files:
perl-Data-Dumper-Concise.spec sources
Log Message:
* Mon Mar 08 2010 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 1.200-1
- update by
On 03/11/2010 05:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:52:06PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
That might be harsh for some soname updates.
If a user has built an application against a library, it's not
especially reasonable to then break that application
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:24:15PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/12/2010 08:24 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen is that
the
infrastructure needs to improve, not that the whole world adapts to stone-
On 03/12/2010 10:12 PM, Ewan Mac Mahon wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:24:15PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/12/2010 08:24 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen is that
the
infrastructure needs to
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 09:58:58AM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com writes:
The point is: this update *does* work. The error message is non-fatal.
The software works. So what they claim is correct. What you claim is
also correct.
If the user/group
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-ConfigLoader/F-13
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9348
Modified Files:
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-ConfigLoader.spec
Log Message:
* Tue Feb 23 2010 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.27-3
- update by
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-SubRequest/F-12
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9612
Modified Files:
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-SubRequest.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sun Feb 21 2010 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.16-1
- update by
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 5:32 PM, John J. McDonough wb8...@arrl.net wrote:
Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen
is that the infrastructure needs to improve, not that the whole
world
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView/F-13
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9876
Modified Files:
perl-Catalyst-Action-RenderView.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sun Feb 21 2010 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.14-1
- update by
On 03/12/10 14:01, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:23:58PM +, Andy Green wrote:
However I agree this isn't a real issue, the packages with the homegrown
apps should choke the yum update because they see the lib versions they
depend on would go away,
Friday, March 12, 2010, 10:52:35 AM, spot you wrote:
On 03/12/2010 10:47 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
I really think this is not the approach, unless Fedora is just for rich
people
in (theoretically) rich countries. I doubt that's what we want.
Or we could just make Fedora print money. ;)
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:19:45 +
Andy Green a...@warmcat.com wrote:
On 03/12/10 15:11, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
Andy Green wrote:
On 03/12/10 00:45, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
If you are the user, then you should not be compiling
software. :-) You
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:05:28AM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 12/03/10 03:42, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Adams wrote:
There's a difference between not supporting third-party software (is
that actually documented somewhere or another Kevin Kofler rule?) and
intentionally breaking it.
On 03/11/2010 07:18 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Once 4.n+1.0 is out, 4.n.x is no longer updated, there are no further bugfix
releases, any bugs in it will stay unfixed. And there are also nice new
features in the new version.
So this all boils down to you, the package maintainer, being
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:53:49AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer market.
What I don't get, seriously, is why people in 2. can't use rawhide or
the latest updates-testing and instead pretend to inflict almost
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:48:23AM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 12.3.2010 02:26, Mike Chambers napsal(a):
On F13, upgrade gnome-panel to version in updates-testing and you'll get
When was F13 released? Oh, it wasn't, so it is just glorified Rawhide
still? And you complain about it being
Greetings,
The first scheduled [1] Fedora 13 Beta blocker bug review was held
earlier today. In addition to evaluating the current list of F13Beta
bugs [2], we also reviewed the F13Blocker list [3] for bugs that fit the
Beta release criteria [4].
Thanks to all who helped move the meeting along.
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:19:07PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
A) Fedora requires backports for problems that break ABI. Note that this
also means that Fedora may need to have people who create non-upstreamable
patches to software since some upstream fixes may require ABI changes and
we'd
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:42:18 -0500
Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:48:23AM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 12.3.2010 02:26, Mike Chambers napsal(a):
On F13, upgrade gnome-panel to version in updates-testing and
you'll get
When was F13 released? Oh,
On 03/12/10 18:06, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
In this context, if you're writing homegrown apps, you're a
developer, not a user, so the above sentence obviously does not
apply. Instead, my original point does (you'll be compiling your
own software very often anyway).
It's a
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:56:07AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
As in, on average what are the costs of leaving a bug in vs. the cost of
updating to a new release. I noticed that there's a number of bugs that only
affect a subset of users that (often) can work around the issue. So the cost
-
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 02:18:23PM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Other distributions manage this without too much trouble, so I don't see
it being a problem to adopt this policy.
1 word: Resources - person power, time, funding, equipment, etc.
Fedora is a free software
I noticed that we were missing from this page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicating_and_getting_help#Contributors_Mailing_Lists
so I've gone ahead and added a link to this list to it.
Hopefully this will make us more visible after the mailing list
reorganization.
Dave
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 12:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 12/03/10 12:12, Thomas Janssen wrote:
--sniped--
Oh, so it's our fault?
It's just life, in all it's forms.
Exactly. And if i live in an area where i cant have everything, i
can't choose everything.
Bringing it back to
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I think you're hitting the nail on the head with this question. However,
I'm afraid that the answer depends on the class of user. Some users want to
have their old bugs fixed ASAP and are willing to tolerate some regressions
as long as those
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 19:22 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 02:18:23PM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Other distributions manage this without too much trouble, so I don't see
it being a problem to adopt this policy.
1 word: Resources - person power, time,
Hi,
Please review the patch for this bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470684
Patch:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=399730action=edit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=399730action=diff
Due to the following issues:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Be sure to let our friends in developing countries know that to make
Fedora's life easier, they'd better get their infrastructure updated
pronto?
Developing countries need to, well, DEVELOP their infrastructure. In the
meantime, there are plenty of distributions with fewer
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 14:00 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Except for a few people's proposals (dledford, adamw, jreznik, lmacken,
dmalcolm) most of the proposals are weighting one of these viewpoints over
the other which is not a very good way to build a community.
Actually I think it's a
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
RHEL has the resources to backport. Centos uses those backpotrs for
free, but does not generate them (unless again the party supporting a
component for Centos happens to be upstream in RHEL).
Debian has historically managed this. I really
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 20:51 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Be sure to let our friends in developing countries know that to make
Fedora's life easier, they'd better get their infrastructure updated
pronto?
Developing countries need to, well, DEVELOP their infrastructure.
Peter Jones wrote:
It also implies that we're okay shipping updates of whole dep chains for
any bug whatsoever in a stable release. This is a gigantic problem! Many
people have complained about this - it uses much more bandwidth and
storage, even with deltas (in fact, significantly more
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 21:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Peter Jones wrote:
It also implies that we're okay shipping updates of whole dep chains for
any bug whatsoever in a stable release. This is a gigantic problem! Many
people have complained about this - it uses much more bandwidth and
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 04:39:30AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
If the software is not maintained within Fedora, there's no notification
of soname bumps.
There is, soname bumps are supposed to be announced on this public list.
A list that is targetted at developers of
John J. McDonough wrote:
Much of this state has a population density less than 5 people per
square kilometer, and that is crowded compared to many of the western
states. At those population densities it will be some time before
technology will be able to deliver high bandwidth connections
Compose started at Fri Mar 12 09:15:20 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1
easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5
The owner of easystroke has orphaned it, I'm just sending a note out in
case anyone wants it.
-Mike
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:59:30 +
Andy Green a...@warmcat.com wrote:
On 03/12/10 18:06, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
In this context, if you're writing homegrown apps, you're a
developer, not a user, so the above sentence obviously does
not apply. Instead, my original
On 03/12/2010 03:04 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Peter Jones wrote:
So this all boils down to you, the package maintainer, being unwilling or
unable to actually fix bugs? Is that what you're saying?
KDE upstream fixes hundreds of bugs each month. It is just plain impossible
to backport all
Thomas Janssen wrote:
That was the first post who made me think different about the infra
problem. I'm still not with the idea to change Fedora completely. But i
think a compromise like N-1 as much as possible only security and bugfixes
(from our bugzilla only, so it's clear *our* users face
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:11 +0100
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
The problem is, if all the
distributions optimize for people with low bandwidth, then what
should people like me who have higher bandwidths and would like to
use their bandwidth to get current software use?
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:33:31 +0100
Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Marcela Maslanova
mmasl...@redhat.com wrote:
I created testing repo [1] with two updated core modules
and updates repo with perl(core) packages.
I've tested this scenario:
1/ perl
Hello Simo,
Friday, March 12, 2010, 3:42:41 PM, you wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
jreznik's, is that it
1 - 100 of 172 matches
Mail list logo
