Need perl help to remove dpkg dependency on licensecheck (devscripts-minimal)

Hi Recent versions of devscripts-minimal (containing licensecheck) began depending on dpkg-perl due to [1]. Unfortunately I'm quite unfamiliar with perl, can anyone suggest an alternative way to accomplish the same which does not use spawn from Dpkg::IPC? Thanks Sandro [1]

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On 8 October 2015 at 23:58, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: >> In many cases, this effectively means creating a Fedora-specfic fork of >> the project. > > Only if you call patches to the build system (with little to no changes to > the actual code) a "fork". >

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

2015-10-09 1:17 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kofler : > Haïkel wrote: >> Not that I'm 100% happy with the way it happened but this has been a >> very long-lived topic. To some, it'll be a hasty decision, to others, >> it's already a late one. > > There's a REASON it had always been shot

Re: "Unbundling SIG" was [Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)]

Matthew Miller wrote: > When the packager has reasoned belief that debundling is actively bad > in some way for this package, I think we should trust the packager. I > know not everyone on this thread agrees, but in general, Fedora > *always* places a high level of trust in our packagers to make

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Adam Jackson wrote: > I'd call that the app not working, yes. Symbol conflicts are literally > trivial to find, I'm really not sure why you bring the point up. Because it is the worst possible consequence of bundled libraries (or abuse of compatibility libraries – there too, more effort needs

Re: repodata size

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: > >> On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> >>> >>> From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata >>> pulled down so DNF can

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Neal Gompa wrote: > ​At this point in time, Fedora is the only major distribution I know of > that doesn't use versioned shared library package names. Both SUSE and > Mageia do, and of course the Debian/Ubuntu family does. I've spoken to > folks working in both SUSE and Mageia (especially Mageia

Re: repodata size

Orion Poplawski wrote: > Perhaps every product should produce a os/{repodata,Packages} directory as > well as an updates/VERSION/PRODUCT/ tree with . Please no! Let's not fragment Fedora even more than it already is with those "products". * Would packages belonging to multiple products (kernel,

Re: repodata size

On 10/09/2015 05:20 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Orion Poplawski wrote: Perhaps every product should produce a os/{repodata,Packages} directory as well as an updates/VERSION/PRODUCT/ tree with . Please no! Let's not fragment Fedora even more than it already is with those "products". * Would

Fedora Rawhide 20151009 compose check report

Missing expected images: Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Kde live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151008 Images in Rawhide 20151008 but not this: Design_suite live x86_64 Cloud docker x86_64 Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Design_suite live i386 Kde live x86_64 -- Mail

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:38:30AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > On 10/09/2015 10:27 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:46:11AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > >> On

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Adam Jackson wrote: > Bundling is _not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good > example of this, Firefox is exactly an example of how NOT to do things, and I'm fed up of it getting a blanket exception to our packaging guidelines. And now the "fix" is to simply remove the guideline for

Re: repodata size

Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice

Re: repodata size

Am 10.10.2015 um 01:59 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > IMHO all we need is to support multiple version of same library > to be installable -- that's mine point why usability of Fedora > is miles behind other distros. Then you open the doors to symbol conflicts (see my reply to Adam Jackson elsewhere in this thread). And

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Chris Adams wrote: > Is that short-sighted? IMHO yes. Can Fedora fix that? Doubtful. > There are three choices: > > - Fedora attempts to patch in a stable(-enough) ABI, build shared > libraries, and unbundle all consumers of said libraries. This is a > large (and growing) amount of work,

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Ian Malone wrote: > I'm actually all for unbundling, but going it alone is not guaranteed > to be simple. "Oh, hey, that deprecated function has been removed." Then you try to port the application to the new APIs, and if it's not possible, you revert the library commit that removed the old API.

Request to co-maintain f22-background

Hello, I built an update for f22-backgrounds package which includes the missing supplemental backgrounds. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/f22-backgrounds/ Unfortunately, I do not have permission to commit the change although I uploaded the latest tar.xz file as

Re: repodata size

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:41:15PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata > > pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire > > (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice to not have > > that

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:38:30AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 10/09/2015 10:27 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:46:11AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:05:00 +0200 > >> Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> > >>> This does

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > How are the screenshots rebased? Is it all manual work? > > More or less. the openQA web UI has an interactive needle editor > which > lets you basically run a test and pause after each failed match, then > you can fiddle with the

Cancelling request

One of proven packager, nonamedotc, will be able to commit the updated f22-backgrounds. The request of co-maintainance is no longer required. Regards, -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic & Web Designer E: l...@fedoraproject.org W: http://www.coolest-storm.net -- devel mailing list

Re: Proposal: retire lesstif in f24 and beyond

On 10/09/2015 09:17 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 8 October 2015 at 17:04, Kevin Kofler wrote: Christopher Meng wrote: IMO motif should 'Obsoletes' lesstif in Fedora since motif is free now. The reason we kept lesstif even after OpenMotif was finally freed is

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Neal Gompa wrote: > > ​At this point in time, Fedora is the only major distribution I know of > > that doesn't use versioned shared library package names. Both SUSE and > > Mageia do, and of course the Debian/Ubuntu

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are > created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the > buildroot. this means that in f24 and on dnf will be used to create the >

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On 10/09/2015 10:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > >>> How are the screenshots rebased? Is it all manual work? >> >> More or less. the openQA web UI has an interactive needle editor >> which >> lets you basically run a test and pause after

rawhide buildroot creation changes

Hi all, as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the buildroot. this means that in f24 and on dnf will be used to create the buildroot. as well as manage the updates on your system. We

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 14:55 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > Interesting taking the consumer perspective. > > So where does FESCo intend to draw the line now that it has chosen to > head down this path. I mean, I can't speak for fesco as a whole, but speaking for myself: I reject the

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:16:31AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > So from an OS maintenance perspective we have to recognize that > bundling code occasionally does have merit, and that it is incumbent on > us to manage it well. And from a Fedora perspective, we have to > acknowledge that a

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:22:34 +0200 Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > If all it would take would be e.g. : dnf install-compat > > Otherwise you basically require that every user of Fedora is > supposedly quite skilled rpm package-maintainer ?? > (Which would roughly cut the user-base

Re: Request to co-maintain f22-background

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:37:56AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 23:32 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > > I built an update for f22-backgrounds package which includes the > > missing > > supplemental backgrounds. > > Isn't it rather late to be adding wallpapers to F22?

Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

No missing expected images. Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151008: Cloud docker x86_64 Images in 23 Branched 20151008 but not this: Workstation disk raw armhfp Failed openQA tests: 48 of 52 ID: 5182Test: i386 kde_live default_install ID: 5181Test: x86_64

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:46:11AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:05:00 +0200 > Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > This does not scale unfortunately ... and it is common excuse to not > > support it properly. IOW, I want to have package foo-1.0 installed > > side by

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:05:00 +0200 Vít Ondruch wrote: > This does not scale unfortunately ... and it is common excuse to not > support it properly. IOW, I want to have package foo-1.0 installed > side by side with foo-2.0 and I don't want to have foo1-1.0 side by > side with

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 12:17 -0400, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151008: > > Cloud docker x86_64 > > Images in 23 Branched 20151008 but not this: > > Workstation disk raw armhfp > > Failed openQA tests: 48 of 52

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 12:08 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: On Wednesday, 07 October 2015 at 21:17, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Meeting summary --- [...] * #1483 Decision on bundling policy in the Fedora Package Collection (sgallagh, 18:11:40) * LINK:

F-23 Branched report: 20151009 changes

Compose started at Fri Oct 9 07:15:03 UTC 2015 Broken deps for armhfp -- [389-ds-base] 389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpmio.so.3 389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpm.so.3 [CableSwig]

[Bug 1270255] New: perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.20 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270255 Bug ID: 1270255 Summary: perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.20 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Text-CSV_XS Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Re: Need perl help to remove dpkg dependency on licensecheck (devscripts-minimal)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > can anyone suggest an alternative way to accomplish the same which > does not use spawn from Dpkg::IPC? > > [1] > https://github.com/Debian/devscripts/commit/c0687bcde23108dd42e146573c368b6905e6b8e8 # at top of

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-10-09 1:17 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kofler : > > Haïkel wrote: > >> Not that I'm 100% happy with the way it happened but this has been a > >> very long-lived topic. To some, it'll be a hasty decision,

Re: Need perl help to remove dpkg dependency on licensecheck (devscripts-minimal)

On 09.10.2015 12:26, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: can anyone suggest an alternative way to accomplish the same which does not use spawn from Dpkg::IPC? [1]

rawhide report: 20151009 changes

Compose started at Fri Oct 9 05:15:02 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [CableSwig] CableSwig-3.20.0-13.fc23.i686 requires gccxml [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0

Re: what it takes to unbundle, in triangle form

On 10/08/2015 08:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:37:32PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Maybe we're trying to do too much. >> >> I suppose it's a question of choosing to do something which from a >> software engineering perspective is not the best practice or not >>

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 12:06:31AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > * #1483 Decision on bundling policy in the Fedora Package Collection > > (sgallagh, 18:11:40) > > * LINK: http://paste.fedoraproject.org/276064/44243383/ is sgallaghs > > proposal without the

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:50:27PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: This opens the door to all kinds of duplication, waste of disk space, waste of RAM, symbol conflicts and unfixed security issues! I agree - the new wording does appear to give in

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming > practices. Bundling is _not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good example of this, there have been several cases where using the system instance of

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 2015-10-09 10:02 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/09/2015 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:50:27PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: This opens the door to all kinds of duplication, waste of disk space, waste of RAM, symbol conflicts and unfixed security issues! I

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Dne 9.10.2015 v 16:16 Adam Jackson napsal(a): On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming practices. Bundling is _not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good example of this, there have been

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On 10/09/2015 06:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 12:17 -0400, Fedora compose checker wrote: >> No missing expected images. >> >> Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151008: >> >> Cloud docker x86_64 >> >> Images in 23 Branched 20151008 but not this: >> >> Workstation

"Unbundling SIG" was [Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)]

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:00:30AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > +1 And I was serious about it, rather sticking to guidelines as if > > they were dogma, I prefer positive actions to fight poor > > practices. > I'm thoroughly behind this. I think an unbundling SIG is a far better > solution

Re: Request to co-maintain f22-background

On 09/10/15 08:37 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 23:32 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: >> I built an update for f22-backgrounds package which includes the >> missing >> supplemental backgrounds. > Isn't it rather late to be adding wallpapers to F22? Even if it's a bug > that

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 10:27 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:46:11AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:05:00 +0200 >> Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >>> This does not scale unfortunately ... and it is common excuse to not >>> support it

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 18:46 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 10/09/2015 06:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 12:17 -0400, Fedora compose checker wrote: > > > No missing expected images. > > > > > > Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151008: > > > > > > Cloud docker

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 08:16 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: > Reality is complicated, we would do well to recognize that. > > - ajax > Thank you very much for the excellent posts. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX:

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:50:27PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > This opens the door to all kinds of duplication, waste of disk space, waste > > of RAM, symbol conflicts and unfixed security issues! > I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming > practices. Do you

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 01:22 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Jackson wrote: > > From the consumer's perspective it makes zero difference whether a > > particular library is bundled or not, as long as the app works. > > Only until they run into their first symbol conflict due to conflicting >

Introduction

Hello! Although my legal name is Chandler, please just call me Lyude ;). I've been a Linux user for a couple years now, and as of the past few years have became a developer and am working on making a career out of it. I'm currently interning for Red Hat and hoping to get a full time job at the end

Re: Setting + for fedora-review?

No, as it turns out I'm not in the packager group and I guess I must have missed that when reading through the package submission process, so I've fixed the bug for my package to block FE-NEEDSPONSOR so I can get into the group. Sorry about that! Cheers, Lyude On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 08:44

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 04:36:37PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > But in the real-world - version changes, it gets incompatible, > requires some new way how to use it and so on This doesn't have to be. It is possible to write libraries, even very complex ones, with endless backwards

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Once upon a time, Richard W.M. Jones said: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 04:36:37PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > > But in the real-world - version changes, it gets incompatible, > > requires some new way how to use it and so on > > This doesn't have to be. It is possible to

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/09/2015 03:04 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 04:36:37PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: >> But in the real-world - version changes, it gets incompatible, >> requires some new way how to use it and so on > > This

Re: Proposal: retire lesstif in f24 and beyond

On 8 October 2015 at 17:04, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Christopher Meng wrote: >> IMO motif should 'Obsoletes' lesstif in Fedora since motif is free now. > > The reason we kept lesstif even after OpenMotif was finally freed is because > OpenMotif only implements the Motif 2

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 08:04:39PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > This doesn't have to be. It is possible to write libraries, even very > complex ones, with endless backwards compatibility. It's what libvirt > does. And the kernel (almost always). > > In fact I'd say breaking your ABI

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On 10/09/2015 07:51 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 18:46 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: >> On 10/09/2015 06:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 12:17 -0400, Fedora compose checker wrote: No missing expected images. Images in this compose but not

Re: repodata size

On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata > pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire > (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice to not have > that overhead (but still have

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On 10/09/2015 06:17 PM, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151008: > > Cloud docker x86_64 > > Images in 23 Branched 20151008 but not this: > > Workstation disk raw armhfp > > Failed openQA tests: 48 of 52 > > ID: 5182

Re: Fedora 23 Branched 20151009 compose check report

On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 21:41 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > These failed test IDs are all nice to see, but they don't say much to > the uninitiated. :) Yeah, what I'd actually like to do is have links to the tests; the reason we can't do that right now is that the openQA instance is behind the RH

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:36:37 +0200 Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > IMHO all we need is to support multiple version of same library > to be installable -- that's mine point why usability of Fedora > is miles behind other distros. ...snip... We do. If you need a different

Setting + for fedora-review?

Hi, I recently did a review swap with someone, and approved their package. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1257410 (I should note Lyude is the same person as me, that's just my non -redhat bugzilla account) The guide here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process sa ys that

Re: Setting + for fedora-review?

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:40:28 -0400 Stephen Chandler Paul wrote: > Hi, I recently did a review swap with someone, and approved their > package. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1257410 > (I should note Lyude is the same person as me, that's just my non > -redhat

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/09/2015 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:50:27PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >>> This opens the door to all kinds of duplication, waste of disk space, waste of

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Dne 9.10.2015 v 16:41 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:36:37 +0200 > Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > >> IMHO all we need is to support multiple version of same library >> to be installable -- that's mine point why usability of Fedora >> is miles behind other

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

2015-10-09 16:20 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : > > A SIG dedicated to going through our packages and "systemizing" them (e.g. > unbundling them) would probably be a really good idea, especially with the > new rules. A group of packagers experienced in this could be solicited to > help

Re: Setting + for fedora-review?

On 10/9/15, Stephen Chandler Paul wrote: > Hi, I recently did a review swap with someone, and approved their > package. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1257410 > (I should note Lyude is the same person as me, that's just my non > -redhat bugzilla account) > The guide

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 02:16 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming >practices. Bundling is_not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good example of this, there have been

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/09/2015 10:42 AM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-10-09 16:20 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : >> >> A SIG dedicated to going through our packages and "systemizing" >> them (e.g. unbundling them) would probably be a really good idea, >>

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Dne 9.10.2015 v 16:41 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:36:37 +0200 Zdenek Kabelac wrote: IMHO all we need is to support multiple version of same library to be installable -- that's mine point why usability of Fedora is miles behind other distros.

Re: Request to co-maintain f22-background

On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 23:32 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > I built an update for f22-backgrounds package which includes the > missing > supplemental backgrounds. Isn't it rather late to be adding wallpapers to F22? Even if it's a bug that they're missing, that's the sort of thing that should

[Bug 1270076] perl-Log-Report-1.08 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270076 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Log-Report-1.08-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 21. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-6d5c41bb1b -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1250532] perl-Text-Xslate-3.3.7 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250532 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED

eseyman uploaded App-Cmd-0.329.tar.gz for perl-App-Cmd

3f1e1f325b0c13bb23926aaa98af522c App-Cmd-0.329.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-App-Cmd/App-Cmd-0.329.tar.gz/md5/3f1e1f325b0c13bb23926aaa98af522c/App-Cmd-0.329.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing

eseyman pushed to perl-Catalyst-View-TT (master). "Update to 0.44"

From 80bf3e9cb2b0f9db93e90c60dc7ddd5af6d43dd9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Emmanuel Seyman Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:34:18 +0200 Subject: Update to 0.44 --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-Catalyst-View-TT.spec | 6 +- sources| 2 +- 3 files

eseyman uploaded Mojolicious-6.23.tar.gz for perl-Mojolicious

aace8c973abee7a59fa865ef3a954f18 Mojolicious-6.23.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Mojolicious/Mojolicious-6.23.tar.gz/md5/aace8c973abee7a59fa865ef3a954f18/Mojolicious-6.23.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl

jplesnik pushed to perl-Text-Xslate (master). "3.3.7 bump"

From 2e7586dc398528871074fb744fda34dbeb174375 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jitka Plesnikova Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:23:19 +0200 Subject: 3.3.7 bump --- .gitignore| 1 + perl-Text-Xslate.spec | 9 ++--- sources | 2 +- 3 files changed, 8

[Bug 1270189] New: Upgrade perl-Cairo to 1.106

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270189 Bug ID: 1270189 Summary: Upgrade perl-Cairo to 1.106 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Cairo Keywords: FutureFeature Assignee: tcall...@redhat.com

[Bug 1225047] Upgrade perl-Curses

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225047 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Curses-1.32-1.fc22

[Bug 1270197] perl-MooseX-Method-Signatures-0.49 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270197 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1081228 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1081228=edit [patch] Update to 0.49 (#1270197) -- You are

[Bug 1270197] New: perl-MooseX-Method-Signatures-0.49 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270197 Bug ID: 1270197 Summary: perl-MooseX-Method-Signatures-0.49 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-MooseX-Method-Signatures Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

eseyman uploaded Catalyst-View-TT-0.44.tar.gz for perl-Catalyst-View-TT

0f6b73ea9885ff2839cabf9dbcb91559 Catalyst-View-TT-0.44.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Catalyst-View-TT/Catalyst-View-TT-0.44.tar.gz/md5/0f6b73ea9885ff2839cabf9dbcb91559/Catalyst-View-TT-0.44.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG

eseyman uploaded Struct-Dumb-0.06.tar.gz for perl-Struct-Dumb

c373d0bf5c37bbd03c0b1d93c27ab95c Struct-Dumb-0.06.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Struct-Dumb/Struct-Dumb-0.06.tar.gz/md5/c373d0bf5c37bbd03c0b1d93c27ab95c/Struct-Dumb-0.06.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl

[Bug 1269061] perl-Catalyst-View-TT-0.44 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269061 --- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- eseyman's perl-Catalyst-View-TT-0.44-1.fc24 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=690577 -- You are receiving this

eseyman pushed to perl-Variable-Magic (master). "Update to 0.59"

From f53e2f4df93fbe6b42868642b68f25d6320b2127 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Emmanuel Seyman Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:47:01 +0200 Subject: Update to 0.59 --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-Variable-Magic.spec | 5 - sources | 2 +- 3 files changed,

eseyman pushed to perl-Mojolicious (master). "Update to 6.23"

From e29ed0de574e720140efff2a1b0650e2c2c8a3a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Emmanuel Seyman Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:00:51 +0200 Subject: Update to 6.23 --- .gitignore| 1 + perl-Mojolicious.spec | 5 - sources | 2 +- 3 files changed, 6

jplesnik pushed to perl-Tree-R (master). "0.072 bump"

From 29bfe1c816bb5c8beddff655b5c6f543c0416ec0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jitka Plesnikova Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 12:23:38 +0200 Subject: 0.072 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-Tree-R.spec | 15 ++- sources | 2 +- 3 files changed, 12

[Bug 1270076] perl-Log-Report-1.08 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270076 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Log-Report-1.08-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-60a13a9011 -- You are receiving this mail

jplesnik uploaded Text-Xslate-3.3.7.tar.gz for perl-Text-Xslate

4a05ff0e0cb56475a1520230a9dd299b Text-Xslate-3.3.7.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Text-Xslate/Text-Xslate-3.3.7.tar.gz/md5/4a05ff0e0cb56475a1520230a9dd299b/Text-Xslate-3.3.7.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl

[Bug 1270076] perl-Log-Report-1.08 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270076 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Log-Report-1.08-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-cca919fd76 -- You are receiving this mail

ppisar pushed to perl-Unicode-Normalize (f23). "1.21 bump"

From c18b112b59253b330cd3942ff01cbfb33095358b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20P=C3=ADsa=C5=99?= Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:27:30 +0200 Subject: 1.21 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-Unicode-Normalize.spec | 7 +-- sources

[Bug 1270090] perl-Unicode-Normalize-1.21 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270090 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In

[Bug 1270090] perl-Unicode-Normalize-1.21 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270090 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Unicode-Normalize-1.21-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-c53bbb2c60 -- You are receiving

  1   2   >