On 9/2/22 13:49, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36.
>
> This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several
> addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with
> autopush enable and just a karma threshold
On 9/2/22 22:06, Ian Chapman wrote:
> On 03/09/2022 01:49, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
>> Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36.
>>
>> This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several
>> addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with
I have a naive question...
I wonder if the folks who do a lot of zuul-ci (eg. opendev.org or
https://www.softwarefactory-project.io ) have methods to determine which
gating criteria to automate?
-Blaise
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 10:39 AM Kalev Lember wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 3:16 PM Ben
On 03/09/2022 01:49, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36.
This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several
addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with
autopush enable and just a karma threshold of
On 2022-09-02 10:49 a.m., Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36.
This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several
addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with
autopush enable and just a karma
On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 22:43 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 8:02 PM Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
> >
> > On 9/1/22 13:47, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > > With loading or not loading file list it is not so easy or in general -
> > > performance optimization is allways a trade
On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 8:02 PM Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>
> On 9/1/22 13:47, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > With loading or not loading file list it is not so easy or in general -
> > performance optimization is allways a trade one resource for another one or
> > for some features. DNF5 will
On Friday, September 2, 2022 Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > Side note: I have asked for co-maintainers for those packages a couple
> > times, but so far, I have not found any. Perhaps one of the CoreOS people
> > would be interested? It seems those packages are used a lot there based
> > on the bug reports
On 9/2/22 10:20, Maxwell G via devel wrote:
>
> Sep 2, 2022 5:36:41 AM Fabio Valentini :
>
>> Does anybody know whether olem still wants to maintain their Fedora
>> packages?
> I'm fairly sure that they no longer wish to maintain Fedora packages. I
> reached out to them about moby-engine and
On Fri, 2 Sep 2022, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
Note: Sequoia currently uses Nettle on Fedora, but there is ongoing
work to port it to Sequoia to OpenSSL:
I think this should be considered a blocker for changing gpg backends.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123834
Bug ID: 2123834
Summary: perl-Log-Log4perl-1.56 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Log-Log4perl
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 12:12 -0500, Maxwell G via epel-devel wrote:
> I think this whole process should be automated. File bugs that say
> "Heads up:
> your package will be automatically retired after the release of RHEL
> X.X" and
> provide some explanation.
Agreed. This is a pretty mechanical
On 9/2/22 5:07 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:43 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>>
>>> If looking at a single package in isolation it may look wasteful, but from
>>> the POV of the distro as a whole packages with potential mingw sub-RPMs
>>> are a small subset of what goes through
Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36.
This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several
addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with
autopush enable and just a karma threshold of 2. It took less than 5
hours from the time the update
On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 11:22:13AM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220901.n.0
> NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220902.n.0
>
> = SUMMARY =
> Added images:0
> Dropped images: 7
> Added packages: 6
> Dropped packages:6
&
The Go/No-Go meeting for the early F37 Beta target date is Thursday.
Action summary
Proposed blockers
-
1. gnome-initial-setup — Unable to set up enterprise account with
gnome-initial-setup due to missing buttons — NEW
ACTION: Upstream to diagnose and fix
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 12:12:07PM -0500, Maxwell G via epel-devel wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 Troy Dawson wrote:
> > EPEL2RHEL is part of the RHEL 8 and 9 new package workflow. When a RHEL
> > maintainer wants to add a package to RHEL 8 or 9 they start a "new package
> > workflow".
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 3:16 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:00 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > So, one of the implicit questions here is, is it OK to keep twinning
> > these two sets of consequences, or should we split them up?
>
> Yes, it's okay to keep two sets of
Hi all,
rpm 4.18 is on the horizon and includes a new OpenPGP backend based on
Sequoia PGP.
https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.18.0
https://sequoia-pgp.org/
Thanks to Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) for packaging not only
rpm-sequoia, but all of the Sequoia packages for Fedora.
Sep 2, 2022 5:36:41 AM Fabio Valentini :
Does anybody know whether olem still wants to maintain their Fedora
packages?
I'm fairly sure that they no longer wish to maintain Fedora packages. I
reached out to them about moby-engine and containerd at the end of May,
and they said they no longer
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:00 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> So, one of the implicit questions here is, is it OK to keep twinning
> these two sets of consequences, or should we split them up?
Yes, it's okay to keep two sets of consequences together. In fact,
it's preferable. One critpath to rule
OLD: Fedora-37-20220901.n.0
NEW: Fedora-37-20220902.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:6
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:6.54 MiB
Size
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 1:43 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
>> If looking at a single package in isolation it may look wasteful, but from
>> the POV of the distro as a whole packages with potential mingw sub-RPMs
>> are a small subset of what goes through koji every day.
>
>
> Perhaps, but the engineer
Hi everyone, This is a weekly report from the CPE (Community Platform
Engineering) Team.
The report could be found at
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/cpe-weekly-update---week-35-2022/cpe-weekly-update---week-35-2022/.
If you want to receive weekly reports by emails in the future, please
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 3:45 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 04:25:28PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:38 PM Sandro Mani
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On 01.09.22 17:18, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > > > I'd like to unify fltk but there are a couple of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115214
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Link ID||Github
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123426
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-66cf5d4e88 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-66cf5d4e88
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123426
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-5213abf65a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-5213abf65a
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123426
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.72 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/19
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.72 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/19
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Hi all,
This is the "Week 0" email to the devel list according to the
"Non-responsive maintainer policy" for "olem" / Olivier Lemasle.
Non-responsive maintainer bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123691
Their packages are in various states of disrepair, with me maintaining
any
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.72 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/18
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115572
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102635
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112904
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102641
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102674
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.72 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/18
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.72 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/17
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.72 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/17
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.72 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/16
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.72 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/16
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123426
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
Hi Everyone,
This is an email to bring everyone up to speed with the Fedora Messaging
Notifications (FMN) Replacement initiative.
*What is FMN?*
FMN is a service which allows users to create filters on messages sent via
the message bus in Fedora Infrastructure. Users can then forward these
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 04:25:28PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:38 PM Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> >
> > On 01.09.22 17:18, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > > I'd like to unify fltk but there are a couple of things I'm still
> > > unclear about...
> > >
> > > 1. If I build the x86_64
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 05:47:21PM -, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> With loading or not loading file list it is not so easy or in general -
> performance optimization is allways a trade one resource for another one or
> for some features. DNF5 will provide a setting to not load file list, as well
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 04:57:52PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 9/1/22 4:25 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Let me rephrase, is the mingw package going to be built on ALL arches
> > with the expectation that they are the same (like -data packages)? If
> > so, that seems like a huge waste of
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 08:59:49AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 12:43 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 12:10:00PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 09:14 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > > From my perspective,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123150
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123187
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091301
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
52 matches
Mail list logo
