Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:17:37PM +0200, Ben Rosser wrote: Thanks for your words, I appreciate the support on the idea. > 1. Creating new packages has become (more of) a pain since the > retirement of pkgdb2. I know I keep complaining about needing to > manually fetch Pagure API keys, but it is

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 03:17:33PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote: > With about six more emails about it, sure. And another piece of > infrastructure that has to be up and bug-free. > > Even the gating and bodhi emails today are rather a lot: I don't want to > be notified if everything worked correc

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 03:29:23AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:30:28AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:48 AM Robbie Harwood wrote: > > > > > > Pierre-Yves Chibon writes: > > > > > > > Here

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:33:11PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 04:24:29PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 02:57:45PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:36:10AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon w

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:23:21AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 9/26/19 10:28 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Would this change if the PR was automatically tested for you without you > > having > > to do anything? > > I always run local mock builds

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:24:28AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 9/26/19 9:07 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > What is so different in Fedora that we cannot move to this model? > > Is it a tooling issue? > > Is it something else? > > As others have alre

Re: Finding out ownership of packages & branches

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 09:27:29PM +0200, Tim Jackson wrote: > On 30/09/2019 21:02, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 14:54, Tim Jackson wrote: > > > > Where is the canonical source these days for establishing package > > > (co-)ownership, in particular in relation to individ

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:30:28AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:48 AM Robbie Harwood wrote: > > > > Pierre-Yves Chibon writes: > > > > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss: > > > > > &

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 04:46:32PM +0200, Ben Rosser wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 4:29 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > There is a clear initial rejection of a PR-only contribution model. I hear > > that > > and that may mean that we never go this way. I'm hon

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 02:57:45PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:36:10AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > At Flock, a few of us met to discuss a future vision of the packager > > workflow. > > Thi

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:47:24AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 9/26/19 8:42 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Again, I'd like to reinforce that the idea is not to enforce any part of > > this > > workflow tomorrow, it'll be a smooth, slow and long

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 06:38:45AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:11 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > > > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > > > >

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:40:49PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 26. 09. 19 v 15:10 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > > > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > > > > Here is what the

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:14:38AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 09:02, Remi Collet wrote: > > > > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss: > > >

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 01:15:03PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss: &g

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss: > > > > ○ Every changes to dist-git is done via pull-requests > > IMHO Have to

Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

Good Morning Everyone, At Flock, a few of us met to discuss a future vision of the packager workflow. This discussion was triggered by the realization that a number of initiatives are happening around packaging in Fedora but there is no real shared vision on what we want the packager UX/workflow t

Re: Upcoming change for adopting orphaned packages and anitya integration

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 06:39:08PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:21:31AM +0200, Till Hofmann wrote: > > > > > > On 9/13/19 12:32 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > ## Anitya integration > > > > > > Currently

Re: Upcoming change for adopting orphaned packages and anitya integration

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:21:31AM +0200, Till Hofmann wrote: > > > On 9/13/19 12:32 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > ## Anitya integration > > > > Currently if you want to tweak the setting for the anitya integration, you > > need > > to open a pull-req

Re: Upcoming change for adopting orphaned packages and anitya integration

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 03:30:30PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 13/09/19 12:32, Pierre-Yves Chibon ha scritto: > > ## Orphan packages > > > > Currently if a package is orphaned there is no way to adopt it easily on > > dist-git (https://src.fedoraproje

Re: Upcoming change for adopting orphaned packages and anitya integration

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:51:20PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:32:34PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > The Fedora Infrastructure team has been working on making changes to the way > >

Upcoming change for adopting orphaned packages and anitya integration

Good Morning Everyone, The Fedora Infrastructure team has been working on making changes to the way orphaned packages are being adopted as well as the way to set the monitoring status for the integration with anitya (ie: https://release-monitoring.org). ## Orphan packages Currently if a package

Re: is this update stuck? Ceph-14.2.3-1.fc32

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 09:56:05AM +0300, Kaleb Keithley wrote: >[1]https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6f5be50fd9 >Two other ceph updatest submitted around the same time moved to testing >okay. >If it is stuck, can someone with appropriate privs please kick it. It

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 03:11:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 15:05, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > In this case I'd encourage to unpush update A since you know beforehand > > > > and are > > > > not interested in ever seeing this u

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:47:32PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 14:45, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:42:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:42:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: > > > > > > > > > &g

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro Hrončok > > wrote: > > > > If updates in rawhide gating fail the tests, what is the procedure? > > Should t

Re: Fedora 31: Noninstallable Python 2 packages to be retired just before the beta freeze

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 12:18:40PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:25 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > In line with the approved Fedora 31 change, packages that fail to install > > due to > > missing Python 2 dependencies are to be removed. I plan to retire the > > follow

Re: No longer supporting mailing lists:

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:50:29AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > Anyway, I thought this is about switching to external hosting of mailing > lists for those who need them, not banning them altogether. That is correct, while discussing investing in mailing lists the CPE team was really clear that t

Re: Package commit right, how to remove youself?

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:55:39PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > I wonder, how does a packager remove themselves from a package, if they have > commit rights only. The obvious way (going trough Settings), is not possible > (no Settings). This is a known short-coming of pagure that we'll need to add

Re: Orphaning some packages

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 04:03:56AM -0400, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote: > Hi Pierre, > > On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 at 14:35, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > I think it's time I make amends and recognize that I've been a

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Sat, Aug 03, 2019 at 11:20:35AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 8/2/19 11:13 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Pierre-Yves Chibon: > > > >> When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in > >> a new koji tag (which will be the default targ

Re: Orphaning some packages

On Sat, Aug 03, 2019 at 06:52:55PM +, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote: >I'll take the python packagesand igraph. igraph and python-igraph are yours, thanks! :) Pierre ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an ema

Orphaning some packages

Good Morning Everyone, I think it's time I make amends and recognize that I've been a terrible maintainer for a number of my packages. So I'd like to orphan the following packages hoping they can find a better home. I no longer use R, so all of my R libraries: rpms/R-affy rpms/R-affydata rpms/R-a

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:39:09PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:35:11PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 31/07/2019 16:10, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:15:32PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > >>On T

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:15:32PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 11:11:34AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > In this case it's koji. > > > > For every package in the mass rebuild (f31-pending tag) robosign asks > > koji "hey, is foobar-1.0.1-1.fc31 signed' ? koji checks..

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 01:13:50PM -0400, Tim Zabel wrote: >Hello, >I'm a little late to this conversation, but is fpaste in Category 4 due to >the high legal costs, or because of a lack of a maintainer? >It would be sad to see fpaste go away because of legal reasons. Is there a >

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 04:15:31PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Pierre-Yves Chibon: > > > What does it mean for us as packagers? > > -- > > > > When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in > &g

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:11:07AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 5:25 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > I just wanted to let everyone know that this is now live. > > You can see all the updates

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers (75 to be retired)

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:14:38PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 7/27/19 11:53 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > On 26-07-19 18:25, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On 7/26/19 4:25 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>> 2) Make taking over the package a 1 click action > >> > >> There's work to get this happening... >

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:23:32AM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 29/07/2019 11:08, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:19:18PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > On 26/07/2019 14:17, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 12:26:25PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 29. 07. 19 12:08, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:19:18PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > On 26/07/2019 14:17, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:19:18PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 26/07/2019 14:17, Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > This is the first roll-out of this gating change, and so there may > > > be additional > >

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 7/27/19 8:26 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 04:08:40PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > >> Yes and no, robosignatory is swamped signing the builds from the > >> mass-rebui

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers (75 to be retired)

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 04:13:50PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:14 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Can we please stop this gargantuan time waste? Proposal to make this > > less painful: > > > > 1) Have some automated process automatically email co-maintainers when the > >

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:41:44PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I've been trying to build nbdkit which depends on libnbd >= 0.1.9 > in Fedora Rawhide this morning. > > I built libnbd a few hours ago, but it hasn't turned up in Rawhide. > > I also discovered that you can now submit update

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

Good Morning Everyone, I just wanted to let everyone know that this is now live. You can see all the updates going through (or not) to rawhide in: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/releases/F31 Many many thanks to all the people involved, I'm afraid I'll miss some but I'll take the risk, so here it

Re: HEADS UP: Source File Verification

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 06:46:24AM -, Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2019-07-24, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > we've got new section in Packaging Guidelines about verifying upstream > > sources[0] with GPG. Please use it whenever possible :) > [...] > > [0] > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packagi

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:29:56AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 23. 07. 19 22:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package > > gating, > > for single b

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:38:23AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 24. 07. 19 17:30, Robbie Harwood wrote: > > Pierre-Yves Chibon writes: > > > > > When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in > > > a new koji tag (which will be the

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 06:31:50PM -, Robbie Harwood wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 11:30:45AM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote: > > > > So we don't have an easy way to do this. I have a script that monitors the > > entire pipeline/workflow in production and in staging. > > I have been querying

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 11:30:45AM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon writes: > > > When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in > > a new koji tag (which will be the default target for Rawhide). The > > package will be picked up fr

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:42:11PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 23. 07. 19 22:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > How do I enroll? > > Great! We’re glad to see such enthusiasm! You can find the instruction in > > the > > docs on how to enable gating:https://docs.fedora

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:22:01PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:36:35PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 24. 07. 19 14:32, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:02 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > > > > > On 24. 07. 19 10:24, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > > That

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:18:25PM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: >On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 2:33 PM Josh Boyer <[1]jwbo...@fedoraproject.org> >wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:02 AM Miro Hrončok <[2]mhron...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > On 24. 07. 19 10:24, Tom Hughes wro

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:17:41PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 24/07/2019 14:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:13:02PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > Then there's decision_context which apparently does nothing > > > but has to b

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:13:02PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 24/07/2019 13:32, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:02 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > > > On 24. 07. 19 10:24, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > > That said, having to go round adding a mega ugly config file > > > > to every pac

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 11:41:16AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Pierre-Yves Chibon: > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 08:29:03AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> * Pierre-Yves Chibon: > >> > >> > Good Morning Everyone, > >> > > >> &

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:27:35AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:14:05AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:10 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:35:

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:17:20AM +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 22:51:28 +0200 > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide > > package gating, for single bu

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:14:05AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:10 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:35:13PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > &g

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 08:29:03AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Pierre-Yves Chibon: > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package > > gating, > > for single build updates. > > How doe

Re: Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:35:13PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in a new > > koji > > tag (which will be the default target for Rawhide). The package wi

Rolling out Phase I of rawhide package gating

Good Morning Everyone, TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package gating, for single build updates. In a later phase, Rawhide updates that contain multiple builds will also be enabled for gating. Our goal is to improve our ability to continuously turn out a useful Fedor

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:19:17AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > Le 2019-07-22 10:22, Miro Hrončok a écrit : > > > Personally, I wish we had spent less engineering time in > > infrastructure on Modularity and more on the contributor UX :( > > It’s not just Modularity. Modularity is ju

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 03:20:34PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Peter Robinson: > > >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > >> > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engi

Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

Good Morning, We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering (CPE) are taking. [1] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/application-service-c

Re: Disappearing pagure key

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 07:03:52AM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > I generated a new API key on June 16, and used it. Just now, I tried > to do a fedpkg operation that resulted in the error: > > Could not execute request_repo: The following error occurred while > creating a new issue in Pagure: Inval

Re: Fedora 31 Self-Contained Change proposal: Move test.support module to python3-test subpackage

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:48:42AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 25. 06. 19 9:50, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > > > I would say the scoping should happen (e.g. in copr) first, then > > > > > > > we'll > > > > > >

Re: Fedora 31 Self-Contained Change proposal: Move test.support module to python3-test subpackage

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 07:37:19PM -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On Tue, 2019-06-25 at 00:26 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 25. 06. 19 0:18, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-06-24 at 23:09 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > On 24. 06. 19 22:25, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > > > > > On M

Re: RFC: Multiple parallel side tags

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:48:49AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I again completely disagree. There is no reason for weeks of breakage. > > Most of the issues that break composes are unannounced abi bumps where > > just rebuilding dependent packages fixes it. Or broken deps (l

Re: Tagging commit hashes of Koji builds in dist-git

On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 02:07:18PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 7:11 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 7:53 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > > Is there a reason why we do not tag dist-git commits, using a name which > > > is derived from the NEVR from

Re: Tagging commit hashes of Koji builds in dist-git

On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 01:52:20PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > Is there a reason why we do not tag dist-git commits, using a name which > is derived from the NEVR from a Koji build? One of the issue is that currently tags are not immutable, ei packagers could override them. Pierre

Re: Pagure e-mails for my own actions

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:22:24PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hey, > > anybody got a tip how to stop src.fp.o to e-mail me on my own actions? Such > as when I open/merge/close a PR. Pagure does not notify you of your own actions except for these opening and closing of tickets and PRs. There is

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 08:41:56PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 11:04:11AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > Basically, there would now be a button on the sidebar which would show the > > current monitoring status and would allow project admi

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:45:48PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote: > On Wednesday, 10 April 2019 11:04:11 CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 02:55:23PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > >Other than having it as a direct option in [1]

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 02:55:23PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: >Other than having it as a direct option in [1]src.fp.org I think being >part of a special file in git would be next best. In the recent releases pagure grew the possibility to have 3rd party extensions with their own URL endpoi

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:16:24PM +, Jeremy Cline wrote: > On 3/26/19 5:36 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 09:37:26AM +0100, Michal Konecny wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 25/03/19 21:23, Jeremy Cline wrote: > > > >

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 01:33:15PM +0100, Michal Konecny wrote: > > > On 26/03/19 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 09:37:26AM +0100, Michal Konecny wrote: > > > > > > On 25/03/19 21:23, Jeremy Cline wrote: > > > > O

Re: Fork a 119MB pagure project to updating monitoring?

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 09:37:26AM +0100, Michal Konecny wrote: > > > On 25/03/19 21:23, Jeremy Cline wrote: > > On 3/25/19 1:55 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > > > > > > "KF" == Kevin Fenzi writes: > > > > > > KF> Well, I find it unfortunate, does that count? :) > > > > > > It is unfort

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:24:00PM +0800, Zamir SUN wrote: > > > On 3/2/19 5:02 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:57:48PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > >> On 03/01/2019 01:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > >>> ht

Re: tracebacks while "git push"ing to Fedora's git

On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 05:01:03AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Hi, > > when "git push"ing updates to Fedora's git, I am currently encountering this > kind of tracebacks: > > $ git push > Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) > remote: Emitting a message to the fedmsg bus. > remote: * Publishin

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 10:11:27AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 3/4/19 12:47 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 09:40:32AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > >> Also, how are the mass rebuilds envisioned? > > > > Just as anyone would: by opt

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Sun, Mar 03, 2019 at 11:45:31AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 01. 03. 19 22:19, Ben Cotton wrote: > > '''The CI system, the tests and the decision on which tests are used > > to gate upon are out of scope for the present document.''' > > This is both good (specifying explicitly what is this c

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

t; >> > >> This proposal is about the phase 1 of this project. > >> > >> == Owner == > >> * Name: [[User:pingou|Pierre-Yves Chibon]] > >> * Email: pingou - pingoured.fr > >> > >> People who are/will be involved in this: > >>

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 01:36:10PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 3/1/19 1:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhideSinglePackageUpdates > > > ...snip... > > > # Add tests to a package you maintain in Fedora using the [[ > > CI/Quick_Start_Guide ]] document

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 03:05:56PM -0600, Ken Dreyer wrote: >On Fri, Mar 1, 2019, 3:20 PM Ben Cotton <[1]bcot...@redhat.com> wrote: > > ** infrastructure: deploy the new version of bodhi and the new koji > plugin > >What's the new Koji plugin? Good catch, this is a left over fr

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 10:12:00AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:09:48PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: [...] > > > * Single package update > > > ** We will need to write a message-bus listener that will > > > automatically create a

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

This project will be split in two phases, at first only single package > > updates will be supported, in a second stage, we will add support for > > multi-packages updates. > > > > This proposal is about the phase 1 of this project. > > > > == Owner == > &

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:57:48PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 03/01/2019 01:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhideSinglePackageUpdates > > > > == Summary == > > We want to gate packages on test results before they can land in > > rawhide. This will r

Re: Strange rawhide behaviour

On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 05:27:45PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 3:51 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 15:37 +0100, Michal Schorm wrote: > > > Right. > > > > > > Yes, I'm trying to test the installation from the mirrors. There will > > > be a delay. > >

Re: Can we please stop enforcing Signed-off-by commits?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:13:47AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > It happened to me almost dozen times now, so here's my rage :D > > I want to send a pull request to a Fedora project*, I clone it, fork it, > push to the fork, open a PR and there it goes: ... > benefit, just pain. I've signed the F

Re: Organizing a "packager experience" objective and working group

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 01:58:17PM -0500, Ben Rosser wrote: > Hello, > > We had a recent discussion on this list last month about (among other > things) the current state of Pagure as a replacement for pkgdb [1]. > > I mentioned in that discussion that there are various issues which > have arisen

Re: ONGOING PROBLEM: Buildsystem degradation

On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 02:28:38PM +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote: >Thanks Kevin. The build worked! >Sorry about not opening a ticket. That's done here, right? >https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure Correct :) Pierre ___ devel mailing list --

Re: 404 in git email notifications (Was: pagure pushed to git (master). "Updated pull-request 16f37409e293432fb406e514cd649b66: Move git instaweb to a subpackage")

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 04:58:27PM +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: >Looks like in all email notifications like below URL points to 404. Could you forward me one of these emails entirely (so I can check headers and all)? Also, does it happen with all and every notifications or just some? Thanks

Re: prevent accidentally creating branches in dist-git

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 10:31:34AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 9:26 AM Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > > > > I've certainly made the mistake of accidentally creating branches > > in dist-git and now being stuck with them because we can't delete > > them. Now that src.fedoraproject.o

Planned Outage - src.fedoraproject.org - 2018-11-20 08:30 UTC

Planned Outage - src.fedoraproject.org - 2018-11-20 08:30 UTC There will be an outage starting at 2018-11-20 08:30 UTC, which will last approximately 1 hour. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2018-11-20 08:30U

Re: Container updates available in bodhi

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:10:37AM -, Clement Verna wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:05:44PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote: > > > > This is a great news! > > > > Just to clarify for those like me who aren't playing with containers much. > > What happened before? There was no updates of cont

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Owen Taylor wrote: > Thanks for starting this discussion, Matthew! > > A few notes: > > * My personal long-term dream is that all Fedora users are running > Silverblue, we do great automated QA testing, and upgrading from one > Fedora to the next is a no

Re: Container updates available in bodhi

On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:05:44PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote: >Dear all, >It is now possible to use bodhi to release a new container build. >Currently it is following the same flow as packages. >After a successful OSBS build, a bodhi update can be created. Fedpkg does >not yet

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >