Re: Python Annual Release Cycle adjusted to match odd-numbered Fedora releases

Am 07.11.19 um 13:31 schrieb Miro Hrončok: > "[2 months for RCs instead of 1] allows for synchronizing the schedule of > Python release management with Fedora. They've been historically very helpful > in early finding regressions not only in core Python but also in third-party > libraries,

[Bug 1768805] perl-RDF-Trine for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768805 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1769774 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1768805] perl-RDF-Trine for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768805 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1769773 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1769773] New: Add perl-Cache-LRU to EPEL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769773 Bug ID: 1769773 Summary: Add perl-Cache-LRU to EPEL8 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Cache-LRU Assignee: jples...@redhat.com

Python Annual Release Cycle adjusted to match odd-numbered Fedora releases

Hello, I'd like to inform you that [PEP 602] "Annual Release Cycle for Python" has been approved and [PEP 596] "Python 3.9 Release Schedule" is pending approval: tl;dr New Python 3.X versions will be released annually, with RC period adjusted to make it possible to update Python in

List of Python 2 packages to be removed mid-November (= in a week)

Dear maintainers, here is an updated list of packages that (transitively, at build or run time) require Python 2 and have not yet got a FESCo exception to do so. If you were bcced on this e-mail, it affects one or more of your packages. The default action will be to remove such packages

Re: Encrypted DNS in Fedora

On 06/11/2019 18:56, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 4:54 pm, David Sommerseth wrote: >> Yes, TLSv1.3 with encrypted SNI will help to some degree, but still there IP >> addresses you connect to will still provide meta data which can be used to >> profile you and give an

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

On 11/5/2019 9:17 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I'd like to gather a constructive list of the actual use-cases that > you feel Modularity is causing problems for, Thank you, that seems like a very good way forward. > 6. We don't provide a direct solution for parallel-installability. > This is

[Bug 1768805] perl-RDF-Trine for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768805 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1768812 Depends On|1768812

[Bug 1768809] perl-XML-CommonNS for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768809 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1768809] perl-XML-CommonNS for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768809 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2019-304181c8b5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-304181c8b5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are

[Bug 1768803] perl-Geo-Distance for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768803 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1769735 Referenced Bugs:

Re: Please, IMHO, resolve in some way the Samba MIT kerberos problem.

On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 23:28 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:00 PM Dario Lesca > wrote: > > Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 09.03 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha > > scritto: > > > > Can the Fedora samba maintainers do that? > > > > > > > > Thank > > > > > > > > > > They

EPEL-8 builds

Hi, I'd like to know why people are pushing EPEL-8 builds without engaging with the maintainers of the packages. I've had a few packages where I'm the only maintainer and I've explicitly not built them for EPEL-8 for reasons yet people are now coming without any engagement what so ever and

bibutils change soversion anounce

Bibutils 6.8 change soversion to 6.8. I am update it for rawhide, F31, F30. As I see no one package not require it so I will no rebuild anything else. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Getting notified on broken deps from updates-testing

On 07. 11. 19 9:55, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, Nov 7, 2019, 09:25 Miro Hrončok > wrote: On 06. 11. 19 23:10, Randy Barlow wrote: > On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 21:32 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> Is there any good way to get notified about this sort of

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers (incl. wine, dosbox, nextcloud, owncloud)

Hi, I will take dynamite. I've filed an ownership request for this here: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8975 Regards, Hans On 06-11-2019 20:15, Miro Hrončok wrote: The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If

Re: Getting notified on broken deps from updates-testing

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019, 09:25 Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 06. 11. 19 23:10, Randy Barlow wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 21:32 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> Is there any good way to get notified about this sort of problems in > >> timely manner prior to the update being pushed? This is currently

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 05:06:33AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Symbiotic is, I think, the best way to describe the Red Hat/Fedora > > relationship. > > Well, a symbiosis has to go both ways. In this case, I unfortunately get the > feeling that this feature was

[Bug 1768799] perl-Test-LWP-UserAgent for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768799 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from

Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread

On 05. 11. 19 21:17, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I'm sure there are other pain points and I encourage you to share them. Please adhere to the guidelines about objectively measurable issues, though. M4. Since modularity started in Fedora, I've observed a pattern. A certain dnf behavior is UX

Re: Getting notified on broken deps from updates-testing

On 06. 11. 19 23:10, Randy Barlow wrote: On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 21:32 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: Is there any good way to get notified about this sort of problems in timely manner prior to the update being pushed? This is currently not optimal. I'm not familiar with an existing solution to

Re: Please, IMHO, resolve in some way the Samba MIT kerberos problem.

On ke, 06 marras 2019, Scott Schmit wrote: On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:14:34PM +0100, Dario Lesca wrote: Il giorno lun, 04/11/2019 alle 08.38 -0500, Neal Gompa ha scritto: > What defines it as experimental? https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Running_a_Samba_AD_DC_with_MIT_Kerberos_KDC > Using MIT

<    1   2