On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:22 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> * The DistTag should be versioned. Either .eln.elX (e.g. .eln.el9),
>> .elnX (e.g. .eln9), or just plain .elX (e.g. .el9).
>> * Likewise, I think the Koji tags should be
Le 20-04-06 à 15 h 34, Adam Jackson a écrit :
On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 13:46 -0400, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote:
I think we have a fix for that. Let me poke at things a bit.
Have read:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item=Mesa-i915-OpenGL-2-Drop
In the link Alexei posted to Arch,
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 16:02:34 +0100,
Leigh Griffin wrote:
Our stakeholder and engagement point as a team is Fedora Council. If you
have issues with how this was handled from a relationship perspective then
please take that up with the Council. We have engaged with fesco in the
past at the
Ben Rosser writes:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:36 AM Alex Scheel wrote:
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> > From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel"
>> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>> >
>> > Cc: "Nicolas Mailhot"
>> > Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 9:10:56 AM
>> > Subject: Re:
Leigh Griffin writes:
>> If you had stopped at the first
>> objections and revisited the decision making process with the rest of
>> the community involved in an open manner, you would have been forgiven,
>> because everyone here is trying to assume good faith. Alas, you haven't
>> done that.
Yep, I just ran "dnf info kernel" and then right after that "dnf changelog
kernel", in both cases dnf spent over 20 seconds syncing. I haven't seen other
package managers require this much network traffic, and I wonder if a lot of it
could be avoided.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 06. 04. 20 23:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > * Clarify that the time limit on PRs is only for determining if the
> > maintainer is responsive. If they reply, the timer is cleared.
>
> As a side note (probably out of scope of this
On 07. 04. 20 0:47, Justin Forbes wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 04. 20 23:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
* Clarify that the time limit on PRs is only for determining if the
maintainer is responsive. If they reply, the timer is cleared.
As a side note
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:03 PM Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 16:28 -0400, Paul Dufresne via devel wrote:
> > Le 20-04-06 à 15 h 34, Adam Jackson a écrit :
> > > On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 13:46 -0400, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote:
> > > > Xorg does not start without xorg-x11-drv-intel on
On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 23:56 +, Tom Seewald wrote:
> Yep, I just ran "dnf info kernel" and then right after that "dnf
> changelog kernel", in both cases dnf spent over 20 seconds syncing.
> I haven't seen other package managers require this much network
> traffic, and I wonder if a lot of it
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:08 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 23:56 +, Tom Seewald wrote:
> > Yep, I just ran "dnf info kernel" and then right after that "dnf
> > changelog kernel", in both cases dnf spent over 20 seconds syncing.
> > I haven't seen other package managers
On 4/6/20 6:37 AM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
I'm sorry if you took my mail up as implying a lack of value from how
the team historically worked. As a team we are being tasked more and
more with adding what I call real value which is at a new app / service
level that has scale, quality and
>
>
> Yes, this whole "decision" is in dictatorship relation to the community.
>
> Not following the standard procedures caused that I and probably many
> people in the community didn't pay much attention to it.
>
We followed the procedures that were outlined to us.
>
> I thought you are simply
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 11:09:37AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 04. 04. 20 v 21:02 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):
> > * rpmautospec 0.0.1 through 0.0.10 have been released and deployed in
> > staging
>
>
> Could somebody please update on the status? What were the proof of
> concepts, what are
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 10:56 PM Chris Murphy
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:36 PM Randy Barlow
> wrote:
> >
> > On 4/4/20 3:02 PM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > However we do
> > > recognize that it was still nonetheless a decision that was not made
> > > in public, and for that we can only now
- Original Message -
> From: "Miro Hrončok"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 8:28:15 AM
> Subject: Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-04-04
>
> On 06. 04. 20 14:19, Alex Scheel wrote:
> > That part isn't actually clear to me. There's certainly a vocal portion
> >
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:35 AM Momčilo Medić
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 04:40 -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:59 AM Iñaki Ucar
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 03:53, Christopher <
> > > ctubb...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > > > The previous packaging was on
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 1:00 PM stan via devel
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 21:44:16 -0400
> Christopher wrote:
>
> > I'm probably going to abandon the effort anyway. obs-studio in Fedora
> > crashes constantly every time I try to change the settings and save,
> > so I couldn't figure out how to
Rex Dieter wrote:
> FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with work-in-
> progress being done in side tag f33-build-side-21031
>
> I figure it'll take at least a few days to get the core bits and all
> dependencies rebuilt. Will provide status updates as warranted.
Fist
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 23:47:53 -0400
Christopher wrote:
> I actually got it working with v4l2loopback. It normally works quite
That's great!
> well. But, changing settings still crashes.
That's not.
> Literally, all I have to do is: File -> Settings -> toggle any setting
> (just to make "Apply"
On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 04:40 -0400, Christopher wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:59 AM Iñaki Ucar
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 03:53, Christopher <
> > ctubb...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > > The previous packaging was on COPR, but it appears abandoned,
> > > probably
> > > because it's
Thank you, I feel really stupid for missing this. (But to my defense,
having gating.yaml and tests.yml is quite confusing.)
On 2020-04-03 14:49, Lukas Holecek wrote:
> Hi Vojtěch,
>
> The issue is that the file suffix should be `.yaml`, not `.yml`.
>
> Damn that YAML suffix. It's a hard-to-find
Le lundi 06 avril 2020 à 09:03 +0200, Petr Pisar a écrit :
>
> # Build an HTML manual with ascidoc
> %bcond_without docs
> # Perform the tests
> %bcond_without tests
I feel the above syntax is hopeless. You need boilerplate (in all eln
specs!) to explain that foo_without tests means enabling
- Original Message -
> From: "Randy Barlow"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2020 10:35:21 PM
> Subject: Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-04-04
>
> On 4/4/20 3:02 PM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > However we do
> > recognize that it was still nonetheless a decision that
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 9:11 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> I also hope there will be an opportunity for discussion (with input
> from the community) of whether those requirements can be fulfilled in
> some way *other* than using a non-free Gitlab product. To take the
> 'merge train' example - as
On Wednesday, 01 April 2020 at 12:37, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 01. 04. 20 10:53, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 01. 04. 20 v 10:37 Michal Konecny napsal(a):
[...]
> > > To be clear, you mean something like app above the dist-git where
> > > you could do most of the things that are needed for dist-git
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:43 AM Randy Barlow
wrote:
> On 4/3/20 4:41 PM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> > This is how a specific flavour of software development works centered on
> > a singular product, with a shared vision. The CPE relationship with
> > stakeholders is unique, it's clear the visions are
Installation fails like this:
Running transaction
Preparing: 1/1
Installing : perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64 1/1
Error unpacking rpm package perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64
Verifying:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 09:03:08AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 03:14:07PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > This is not what we were discussing. This should be compared with
> > %bcond_with/%bcond_without, which would looks like this:
> >
> > %if 0%{?fedora} > 0
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:14 AM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 01 April 2020 at 12:37, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 01. 04. 20 10:53, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > Dne 01. 04. 20 v 10:37 Michal Konecny napsal(a):
> [...]
> > > > To be clear, you mean something like app above the
Thanks for your input.
I've created an issue to track this: https://pagure.io/greenwave/issue/570
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 8:07 PM Martin Kolman wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Miro Hrončok"
> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <
>
On Sunday, April 5, 2020 12:44:38 PM CEST Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 21:37:05 -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754807
>
> That does look like it. I'll go through the comments and see if I can
> help with more info.
Note also this bug [1]
On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 03:14:07PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> This is not what we were discussing. This should be compared with
> %bcond_with/%bcond_without, which would looks like this:
>
> %if 0%{?fedora} > 0
> %bcond_without docs
> %bcond_without tests
> %endif
>
> %if
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 4:45 PM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> I don't know enough about RPMFusion packaging. I use RPMFusion, but
> haven't looked into the contribution process. In particular, I wonder
> if their modules are signed by a key that's already trusted in Fedora.
> My guess is not, and then
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 03:53, Christopher wrote:
>
> The previous packaging was on COPR, but it appears abandoned, probably
> because it's kind of worthless if it's not signed. And, it's a lot of
> manual work to self-sign and register the key with mokutil, and even
> more effort to figure out how
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:59 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 03:53, Christopher wrote:
> >
> > The previous packaging was on COPR, but it appears abandoned, probably
> > because it's kind of worthless if it's not signed. And, it's a lot of
> > manual work to self-sign and register
Dne 04. 04. 20 v 21:02 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):
> * rpmautospec 0.0.1 through 0.0.10 have been released and deployed in staging
Could somebody please update on the status? What were the proof of
concepts, what are takeaways? Was there any decision on the approach and
why?
Vít
* Ben Cotton:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:16 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> What can I do to fix this?
>>
> Good question! We had this problem before and didn't come to a good
> resolution. I reopened the infra ticket[1] and I'm going to leave the
> page alone for now so they can investigate it.
Hello world
You are invited to attend the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting this
week on Tuesday at 1600UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Freenode):
https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#fedora-neuro
You can convert the meeting time to your local time using:
$ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1600 next Tue'
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 12:00 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> [...]
> Orphaned:
>
> audacity
>
Taken. Will start builds that fix this later today.
-Ian
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On 06. 04. 20 14:19, Alex Scheel wrote:
That part isn't actually clear to me. There's certainly a vocal portion
against using GitLab
I think it's hard to see who's vocal against GitLab and who just wants a truly
open decision process for this.
I've heard people who would love to get GitLab,
On 4/6/20 2:06 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Installation fails like this:
Running transaction
Preparing: 1/1
Installing : perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:26 AM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
>
> Why is it disappointing? The Pagure project isn't suddenly being
> removed from the internet. Is there a reason you can't contribute to
> it to add the features you need?
I can add features, sure, and I do, but I am also not able
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 08:20:47AM -0400, Nick Black wrote:
> hello there in RPM land! i'm a longtime linux user/developer.
> my first Linux install was RedHat 5.1 in the summer of 1998,
> and i've been Free ever since.
Hey hey, it's a small world. :)
- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy
Richard Shaw left as an exercise for the reader:
> Up to you which way to go... I don't see packaging it in RPM Fusion as a
> problem. I would think most people who would be interested in this package
> would likely not have a problem enabling RPM Fusion.
So, if you've seen the demo, that's not
Hi all,
Tomorrow, April 7th 2020, is an important day on the Fedora 32
schedule [1], with significant cut-offs.
Tomorrow we have the Final Freeze [2] which starts at 14:00 UTC.
This means that only packages which fix accepted blocker or freeze
exception bugs [3][4][5] will be marked as 'stable'
On Monday, 6 April 2020, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Yes, this whole "decision" is in dictatorship relation to the community.
>>
>> Not following the standard procedures caused that I and probably many
>> people in the community didn't pay much attention to it.
>>
>
> We followed the
* Petr Pisar:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Installation fails like this:
>>
>> Running transaction
>> Preparing:
>> 1/1
>> Installing : perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64
Hi,
I orphaned libvtemm package. Currently Haïkel Guémar is a co-maintainer.
I advise against claiming the ownership of this package. It's old and
unmaintained. Nothing depends on it, AFAIK.
I assume that the package will be retired automatically at some point.
Cheers,
Krzesimir
On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 13:44 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know
> for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper
> reason:
>
On 06. 04. 20 12:13, Leigh Griffin wrote:
You certainly didn't engage with the community.
We did.
Not enough. You did initially but than you've stopped. You repeating "we have
made a decision" in various threads over and over is not "engaging with the
community", it is the exact
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 11:53:55AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le lundi 06 avril 2020 à 09:03 +0200, Petr Pisar a écrit :
> >
> > # Build an HTML manual with ascidoc
> > %bcond_without docs
> > # Perform the tests
> > %bcond_without tests
>
> I feel the above syntax is hopeless.
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm, Adam Williamson
>
> $100/month per user for Ultimate (the only offering that meets the
> "requirements")... 2339 packages in FAS... so $233900 * 12 works out to
> roughly $3 million per year just for Fedora, assuming we never let
> anybody other than
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 07:07, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Installation fails like this:
> >
> > Running transaction
> > Preparing:
>1/1
> > Installing : perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64
>1/1
> > Error
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:48 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:42 AM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:26 AM Stasiek Michalski
> > > > >
> > > Why is it disappointing? The Pagure project isn't suddenly being
> > > removed from the internet. Is there a
Le lundi 06 avril 2020 à 08:19 -0400, Alex Scheel a écrit :
>
> It'd be interesting to see if the FESCo election system could be
> repurposed to get a sense of all packagers' opinions, rather than
> make assumptions on how the community as a whole feels based on a few
> vocal members and their
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 8:15 PM Jeremy Cline wrote:
> Hi Leigh,
>
> On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 17:00 +0100, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 4:20 PM Jeremy Cline
> > wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 05:38 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:29 AM Michal
On 4/6/20 12:53 PM, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
Le lundi 06 avril 2020 à 09:03 +0200, Petr Pisar a écrit :
# Build an HTML manual with ascidoc
%bcond_without docs
# Perform the tests
%bcond_without tests
I feel the above syntax is hopeless. You need boilerplate (in all eln
specs!) to
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 12:59:40PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 29. 03. 20 13:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > According to the Fedora's Fails To Build From Source policy:
> > Oprhaning is a easily revertible nondesctructiove action.
> > Only packages orphaned for 6+ weeks will be retired (removed
Hello!
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Nick Black wrote:
> (i don't see any of these posts thus far in 2020, so perhaps
> they've fallen out of vogue? i'm merely blindly complying with
> the instructions at [0]).
>
> hello there in RPM land! i'm a longtime linux user/developer.
> my first
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:26 AM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm, Adam Williamson
> > >
> > $100/month per user for Ultimate (the only offering that meets the
> > "requirements")... 2339 packages in FAS... so $233900 * 12 works out to
> > roughly $3 million per year
Hi All,
Please urgently downgrade xorg-x11-drv-intel before shipping Fedora 32 and
spare users some pain. At least two very recent crash/segfault reports are
fixed by downgrading to the fc31 version of xorg-x11-drv-intel.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820815
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 12:00 PM Miro Hrončok
>
> Taken. Will start builds that fix this later today.
>
> -Ian
You could try
https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/free/audacity-freeworld.git/tree/Fix-gcc-10-compile-issue.patch
___
devel mailing list --
- Original Message -
> From: "Michael Catanzaro"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 3:37:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose
> V3
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 5:08 pm, Charalampos
On 06. 04. 20 15:37, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 5:08 pm, Charalampos Stratakis
wrote:
It is reasonable to provide a pull request to fix potential issues with ELN.
What is not reasonable, is to impose a time limit and also expect the
maintainers to follow up with that.
On Monday, 06 April 2020 at 12:41, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 9:36 PM Randy Barlow
> wrote:
>
> > On 4/4/20 3:02 PM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > However we do
> > > recognize that it was still nonetheless a decision that was not made
> > > in public, and for that we can only
20/4/6 12:29(e)an, Leigh Griffin igorleak idatzi zuen:
> Around 10 tickets a month is the average I believe for infra to deal
> with / handle from direct pings.
>
Where?
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues?status=all=src.fp.o=pagure=0_status=
lists 50 tickets for the last year and
This is vaguely related to the ongoing discussions about Git Forge but
it is not an alternative to that, it could complement that.
I've been looking at how upstream tarballs, spec files, SRPMs, binary
RPMs and equivalent artifacts for other distributions could be shared
through IPFS[1]. Has
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
(i don't see any of these posts thus far in 2020, so perhaps
they've fallen out of vogue? i'm merely blindly complying with
the instructions at [0]).
hello there in RPM land! i'm a longtime linux user/developer.
my first Linux install was RedHat 5.1 in the summer of 1998,
and i've been Free
Richard Shaw left as an exercise for the reader:
> So the only problem I see is that notcurses depends on ffmpeg, which is not
> allowed in Fedora. I see it's technically "optional", but I wonder about
> the usefulness of the resultant package without it.
ooh, I was unaware of this. FFmpeg is
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:42 AM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:26 AM Stasiek Michalski
> > >
> > Why is it disappointing? The Pagure project isn't suddenly being
> > removed from the internet. Is there a reason you can't contribute to
> > it to add the features you
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 7:46 AM Nick Black wrote:
> Richard Shaw left as an exercise for the reader:
> > So the only problem I see is that notcurses depends on ffmpeg, which is
> not
> > allowed in Fedora. I see it's technically "optional", but I wonder about
> > the usefulness of the resultant
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 9:36 PM Randy Barlow
wrote:
> On 4/4/20 3:02 PM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > However we do
> > recognize that it was still nonetheless a decision that was not made
> > in public, and for that we can only now offer our apologies for this
> > mistake and learn a hard lesson
On 29. 03. 20 13:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
According to the Fedora's Fails To Build From Source policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
The following packages will be orphaned on Monday 2020-04-06.
Their F32FTBFS Bugzillas are in NEW
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Dne 06. 04. 20 v 12:29 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 11:09:37AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 04. 04. 20 v 21:02 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):
>>> * rpmautospec 0.0.1 through 0.0.10 have been released and deployed in
>>> staging
>>
>> Could somebody please update on the
On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 5:08 pm, Charalampos Stratakis
wrote:
It is reasonable to provide a pull request to fix potential issues
with ELN. What is not reasonable, is to impose a time limit and also
expect the maintainers to follow up with that.
If allowing the ELN maintainers to fix build
On Monday, 06 April 2020 at 12:29, Leigh Griffin wrote:
[...]
> > Yes, this whole "decision" is in dictatorship relation to the
> > community.
> >
> > Not following the standard procedures caused that I and probably
> > many people in the community didn't pay much attention to it.
>
> We followed
- Original Message -
> From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Nicolas Mailhot"
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 9:10:56 AM
> Subject: Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-04-04
>
> Le lundi 06 avril 2020 à 08:19 -0400, Alex Scheel a écrit :
> >
> >
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2020-04-06 15:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
- Original Message -
> From: "Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 7:09:38 AM
> Subject: Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-04-04
>
> On Monday, 06 April 2020 at 12:41, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 9:36 PM Randy Barlow
>
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:03 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> The dist-bound conditional should be specified outside the spec file,
> preferably on a distribution-level. E.g. RHEL decides that it does not
> want to distribute a documentation, then it defines "%_without_docs 1" in
> srpm
> build root
On 06. 04. 20 14:08, Till Maas wrote:
The orphaned packages still contain their previous co-maintainers. It
seems to me to make sense to remove them from the packages as well to
clarify who is really maintaining a package. Since the packages were
already in FTBFS for quite some time, there was
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:42 AM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:26 AM Stasiek Michalski
> > >
> > Why is it disappointing? The Pagure project isn't suddenly being
> > removed from the internet. Is there a reason you can't contribute to
> > it to add the features you
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:14:01PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 06. 04. 20 14:08, Till Maas wrote:
> >The orphaned packages still contain their previous co-maintainers. It
> >seems to me to make sense to remove them from the packages as well to
> >clarify who is really maintaining a package.
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 08:34:07AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Why is it disappointing? The Pagure project isn't suddenly being
> removed from the internet. Is there a reason you can't contribute to
> it to add the features you need?
From my experience, I know that many of my contributions are
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Installation fails like this:
>
> Running transaction
> Preparing:
> 1/1
> Installing : perf-debuginfo-5.5.15-200.fc31.x86_64
> 1/1
> Error
On Monday, 06 April 2020 at 12:59, Miro Hrončok wrote:
[...]
> Orphaned:
> pangox-compat
I'll take it and try to fix it. It's required for the proprietary
Acrobat Reader for Linux. And yes, I know the last version is from 2013
and full of security holes, but it's the only software that can read
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 8:40 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Hello Pythonistas.
>
> (I've CC'ed the devel list for further exposure. But let's discuss this on
> python-devel list please to avoid noise.)
>
>
> We would like ro rename the "python3" component (SRPM) to "python39" to make
> maintaining
On 06. 04. 20 13:04, Petr Šabata wrote:
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can
reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:36 AM Alex Scheel wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Nicolas Mailhot via devel"
> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> >
> > Cc: "Nicolas Mailhot"
> > Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 9:10:56 AM
> > Subject: Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-04-04
> >
> >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820787
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #6 from
pghmcfc commented on the pull-request: `Spec file cleanups: Use make_build and
make_install macros, use NO_PACKLIST=1` that you are following:
``
I merged this locally and fixed the typo in the ExtUtils::MakeMaker reference.
It's now pushed and built in Fedora.
``
To reply, visit the link
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820788
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #6 from
pghmcfc closed without merging a pull-request against the project:
`perl-String-CRC32` that you
are following.
Closed pull-request:
``
Spec file cleanups: Use make_build and make_install macros, use NO_PACKLIST=1
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-String-CRC32/pull-request/1
Hi all,
It is just now decided by FESCO to postpone the freeze by 2 days due
to issues with bodhi and koji, that means, the freeze will start on
Thursday, April 09 2020 at 14:00 UTC.
For more information, please look at https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2369
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:36 AM Mohan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1821367
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Dancer2-0.31-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43064526
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1821367
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1676658
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1676658=edit
[patch] Update to 0.31 (#1821367)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1821367
Bug ID: 1821367
Summary: perl-Dancer2-0.31 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Dancer2
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
101 - 200 of 228 matches
Mail list logo
