Dne 8.4.2013 17:05, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 12:28:01PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 5.4.2013 22:03, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:53:53AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 4.4.2013 20:07, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
There is also an unwritten (I
Why is it 7 days? It used to by 3 days in this period of release cycle,
if I remember correctly. Was there some change?
Vít
Původní zpráva
Předmět:[Fedora Update] [comment] wallaby-0.16.0-3.fc19
Datum: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 22:04:11 +
Od:
Dne 9.4.2013 18:14, Simo Sorce napsal(a):
On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 17:16 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
Am 09.04.2013 14:27, schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 10:10:26AM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
I'm wondering what the interest would be in keeping packages
referenced in
Dne 10.4.2013 18:03, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 12:44:22 +0200
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Why is it 7 days? It used to by 3 days in this period of release
cycle, if I remember correctly. Was there some change?
Nope. Just a mistake. ;)
The pre-beta status wasn't
Hi Bryan,
If you are OK with:
* making the .spef file F19+ compatible only
* dropping the ruby-pam sub-package
I can fix the .spec file for you. Please let me know.
Vít
Dne 15.4.2013 13:54, Bryan Kearney napsal(a):
I am not sure how to fix this. The current spec file in master and f19
Dne 15.4.2013 18:03, Richard Shaw napsal(a):
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com
mailto:a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
If I remember, I tend to trim off changelog entries that are more
than two
years old once a year for packages that I own. Two years is
Dne 17.4.2013 01:30, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
On 15/04/13 05:30 AM, Josef Stribny wrote:
Hi,
change ruby(abi) to Requires: ruby(release) as in guidelines [1]
Each Ruby package must indicate it depends on a Ruby interpreter.
Use ruby(release) virtual requirement to achieve that:
This is
Dear Bryan,
If you think you fixed your package by changing ruby(abi) to
ruby(release) then you don't. Quick look on the RPMs will reveal:
$ rpm -qp -l
http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/rubygem-pam/1.5.4/15.fc19/x86_64/rubygem-pam-1.5.4-15.fc19.x86_64.rpm
Hi,
Since not a long ago, I cannot build Ruby for Rawhide, while it works
just fine for F19. I observe following 4 errors in its test suite:
7) Error:
test_proxy_eh_ENV_no_proxy(TestNetHTTP):
Errno::ECONNREFUSED: Connection refused - getaddrinfo
Dne 23.4.2013 14:33, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hi,
Since not a long ago, I cannot build Ruby for Rawhide, while it works
just fine for F19. I observe following 4 errors in its test suite:
7) Error:
test_proxy_eh_ENV_no_proxy(TestNetHTTP):
Errno::ECONNREFUSED: Connection refused - getaddrinfo
Dne 24.4.2013 13:03, Harald Hoyer napsal(a):
On 04/24/2013 10:27 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 23.4.2013 14:33, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hi,
Since not a long ago, I cannot build Ruby for Rawhide, while it works just
fine for F19. I observe following 4 errors in its test suite:
7) Error
Dne 24.4.2013 13:11, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 24.4.2013 13:03, Harald Hoyer napsal(a):
On 04/24/2013 10:27 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 23.4.2013 14:33, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hi,
Since not a long ago, I cannot build Ruby for Rawhide, while it
works just
fine for F19. I observe following 4
Dne 24.4.2013 13:35, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:27:49AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Seems to be due to systemd-202:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956035
It's a bug in glibc actually:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15339
I found
Dne 25.4.2013 23:03, Tom Callaway napsal(a):
I've done all I can here, for the moment. Here are my notes on the
broken deps:
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.10.6-2.fc19.noarch requires ruby(abi) = 0:1.9.1
This seems to be dead:
Dne 1.5.2013 22:21, Bill Nottingham napsal(a):
Dan Mashal (dan.mas...@gmail.com) said:
I think we should look at package dependencies. It seems that lots of
unnecessary packages are being pulled when composing media.
Here's everything new in the F19 DVD, sorted by size. I've dropped
Dne 3.5.2013 00:22, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 15:01 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Sáb, 2013-04-27 at 15:59 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
this one is no longer relevant and if there would be a karma-option
in koji i would have given as i rolled out 3.8.8-102.fc17.x86_64
in
Dne 14.5.2013 20:46, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
Heck the community did not have the faintest idea which tickets they even
worked ( or did any work at all ) on until I literally request they adopted
the fesco model so we atleast could get a faint idea what was going to be
discussed on those
Dne 16.5.2013 15:29, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
Anyway working with them does not make the process going any faster since to
me the FPC and it's concept is the bottleneck vs the open way of
ack/nack/patch approach where you would have more participants and eyes on
the guidelines changes including by
Dne 16.5.2013 18:40, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson napsal(a):
On 05/16/2013 03:09 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think that JBG built on my proposal. I am personally ambivalent to
disabling FPC. I can imagine that some process as proposed by JBG
would work, but I am afraid it is too big leap
Dne 22.5.2013 14:20, Fedora Rawhide Report napsal(a):
ruby-2.0.0.195-8.fc20
-
* Fri May 17 2013 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com - 2.0.0.195-8
- Update to Ruby 2.0.0-p195 (rhbz#917374).
- Fix object taint bypassing in DL and Fiddle (CVE-2013-2065).
- Fix build against OpenSSL
Dne 22.5.2013 15:52, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:29:00 +0200
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 22.5.2013 14:20, Fedora Rawhide Report napsal(a):
ruby-2.0.0.195-8.fc20
-
* Fri May 17 2013 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com - 2.0.0.195-8
- Update
Dne 23.5.2013 16:29, Miloslav Trmač napsal(a):
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
mailto:vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
*It is not possible to convert the packages technically nor
philosophically*
You might think million times that the sentence
Dne 29.5.2013 04:12, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
We already in fact do an 'upgradepath' check in AutoQA.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work for Rawhide, so it is a bit pointless :/
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Dne 3.6.2013 19:04, Dan Mashal napsal(a):
What is a system wide change vs a self contained change vs a new change?
That is good question. I was always against distinguishing between these
two, but
For example, if there will be new release of Ruby, I am going to propose
them as a self
Hi,
Is there some common practice, where to place architecture specific
header files? From output of the following command, I can't see any such
place.
$ `gcc -print-prog-name=cc1` -v
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.1/include-fixed
ignoring nonexistent
Dne 25.6.2013 22:37, Björn Persson napsal(a):
Petr Pisar wrote:
On 2013-06-25, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Is there some common practice, where to place architecture specific
header files? From output of the following command, I can't see any
such place.
I dont't think so. SDL
Dne 25.6.2013 15:41, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hi,
Is there some common practice, where to place architecture specific
header files? From output of the following command, I can't see any
such place.
$ `gcc -print-prog-name=cc1` -v
ignoring nonexistent directory
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat
Dne 28.6.2013 15:04, Jakub Jelinek napsal(a):
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 25.6.2013 15:41, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Is there some common practice, where to place architecture
specific header files? From output of the following command, I
can't see any
Hi,
I recently did review or rubygem-gssapi [1], which is FFI wrapper above
libgssapi_krb5.so.2.
Now, we'd like to specify dependency directly on this library, but since
rubygem-gssapi is noarch, it seems there is no way how to specify this
dependency better then Requires: krb5-libs, unless
Dne 28.6.2013 15:04, Jakub Jelinek napsal(a):
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 25.6.2013 15:41, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Is there some common practice, where to place architecture
specific header files? From output of the following command, I
can't see any
Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a):
ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion
A Ruby interface to MySQL
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql
Was this intentional? There is no replacement to this package in Fedora
yet, nor it was correctly
Dne 9.7.2013 17:52, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
On 07/09/2013 12:16 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a):
ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion
A Ruby interface to MySQL
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql
Dne 11.7.2013 16:09, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
rubygem-mysql2 is under review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=974889
and that should be used going forward.
Yes, it is ... but if you suggest that is should be used, it should
probably obsolete ruby-mysql and that should be
Dne 15.7.2013 18:31, Bill Nottingham napsal(a):
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Ruby on Rails 4.0 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_on_Rails_4.0
Change owner(s): Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com, Josef Stříbný
jstri...@redhat.com, ruby
Dne 17.7.2013 10:32, Florian Weimer napsal(a):
rubygem-apipie-rails-0.0.21-1.fc19.noarch,/bin/env
Seems to be dead code. I notified upstream about it:
https://github.com/Pajk/apipie-rails/issues/135
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Dne 17.7.2013 21:19, Julian C. Dunn napsal(a):
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org mailto:mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 02:34:40PM -0400, Julian C. Dunn wrote:
https://github.com/brianmario/yajl-ruby/pull/113
I
Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a):
So, maybe, instead of dropping the Provides syslog thing from
journald, maybe we should add an explicit syslog-files dependency (or
something named like that) and then make the classic syslog
implementations provide that and the packages which
Dne 18.7.2013 10:42, Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 10:34 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a):
So, maybe, instead of dropping the Provides syslog thing from
journald, maybe we should add an explicit syslog-files dependency (or
something
Dne 18.7.2013 11:13, Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 10:56 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 18.7.2013 10:42, Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 10:34 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a):
So, maybe, instead of dropping
Dne 18.7.2013 14:19, Lennart Poettering napsal(a):
On Thu, 18.07.13 10:34, Vít Ondruch (vondr...@redhat.com) wrote:
Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a):
So, maybe, instead of dropping the Provides syslog thing from
journald, maybe we should add an explicit syslog-files
Dne 24.7.2013 06:32, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 02:40:56AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
The problem is that you're basically saying my mental model is the right
one, which is not necessarily true for everyone (and not necessarily true
generally). Taking your arguments a
Dne 22.7.2013 18:29, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson napsal(a):
As for cruft in the spec files, why not bring a proposal to the FPC to
update the packaging guidelines stating that Fedora spec files must
not contain RHEL/EPEL macros? Then the git branches would be
maintained separately and the spec files
Hi,
rubygem-i18n_data 0.4.0 license changed from 'Public Domain' to 'MIT'.
Thanks
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Dne 15.8.2013 23:39, Brian Schonecker napsal(a):
Per request at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join I
would like to introduce myself.
Who am I? Brian Schonecker, RHCE and complete novice at building
packages?
What will I
Dne 20.8.2013 15:37, Jaroslav Reznik napsal(a):
* What should I do with my Change now?
According to the policy, the Change has to be substantially complete
and in a testable state; enabled by default -- if so specified by the
Change. If the above applies for you Change, please set bug status
to
Dne 20.8.2013 20:28, Frankie Onuonga napsal(a):
On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 13:01 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 07:35:54PM +0300, Frankie Onuonga wrote:
I am hoping to assist in packaging if required.
what are you interested in? Anything specific? Languages?
I would like
Dne 23.8.2013 10:24, Peter Robinson napsal(a):
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org mailto:mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:08:18PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
What things we do _now_ could be
improved with the
Dne 14.1.2014 21:41, Andrew Lutomirski napsal(a):
I have some trivial cleanups I want to make to a package a maintain.
These cleanups are trivial enough that I don't think they're worth a
new build. Should I commit them to the master branch? If so, I can
imagine a couple of issues:
- A
Dne 15.1.2014 18:12, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 02:16:29PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Actually I'd really love to see some possibility for private branches.
Now, it is possible to push whatever branch (take it literally) you have
in your local git repo into dist-git
Dne 15.1.2014 17:51, Dridi Boukelmoune napsal(a):
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 14.1.2014 21:41, Andrew Lutomirski napsal(a):
I have some trivial cleanups I want to make to a package a maintain.
These cleanups are trivial enough that I don't think
Dne 18.1.2014 07:40, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Mo Morsi wrote:
Yes as others have mentioned puppet requires ruby(release) which is
satisfied by both ruby-mri and jruby
So should
Dne 17.1.2014 23:34, Martin Langhoff napsal(a):
Interestingly enough, after uninstalling jruby, rubypick still thinks
it's installed!
[martin@tp-martin puppet-rlgold.git]$ ruby --help
This is Fedora's rubypick - a Ruby runtime chooser. You can use it
to execute Ruby programmes with any
Dne 20.1.2014 11:48, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 17.1.2014 23:34, Martin Langhoff napsal(a):
Interestingly enough, after uninstalling jruby, rubypick still thinks
it's installed!
[martin@tp-martin puppet-rlgold.git]$ ruby --help
This is Fedora's rubypick - a Ruby runtime chooser. You can use
Dne 24.1.2014 11:03, Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
Hi,
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 10:01 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
There are two ways to fix the jarring UX. We could either ship the
fedora package metadata pre-prepared in PackageKit, maybe using
something like %ghost so the new metadata is ignored.
Dne 24.1.2014 15:05, Richard Hughes napsal(a):
On 24 January 2014 12:20, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Not sure I like the idea. I install the system, eager to start using it,
but in background will run some service downloading some data, which
will make my system sluggish. That would
Dne 21.1.2014 18:01, Kaleb KEITHLEY napsal(a):
Take, for example,
https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/releases, where there's a
button for Source code (tar.gz) pointing at
https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/archive/V2.0.0.tar.gz
Note V2.0.0.tar.gz versus
Dne 31.1.2014 21:23, Ville Skyttä napsal(a):
A number of packages install files to /etc/rpm in Rawhide; the proper
place for macros.* is /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d for rpm = 4.11. And no
matter what the location, these files should not be marked as %config.
Specfiles not targeting EL 7 can simply
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 3.2.2014 11:17, Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
Hi Radek,
On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 04:24 -0500, Radek Holy wrote:
it's wierd, I'm not able to reproduce it here. The command ``dnf
--disablerepo=* --enablerepo=dnf-nightlies list`` outputs::
Looks like
Dne 12.2.2014 10:17, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Hi,
Do we have someone coordinating the Fedora project for the GSOC of
this year?
I may have an idea for a project but my google-fu do not return a wiki
page for
2014.
Thanks,
Pierre
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/GSOC_2014
but it
Dne 28.2.2014 20:51, Simo Sorce napsal(a):
On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 19:37 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 28 February 2014 15:38, Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com wrote:
This should not break builds of any reasonably current software.
libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) is needed by (installed)
Dne 10.3.2014 17:10, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have
divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC
members had a brainstorming session about it and on Friday, sgallagh and
that brainstorming continued
Dne 13.3.2014 10:43, Jaroslav Reznik napsal(a):
- Original Message -
= Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby 2.1 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.1
Change owner(s): Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
Ruby 2.1 is the latest stable version of Ruby, with major increases
Dne 13.3.2014 13:17, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 05:43:16AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
- Original Message -
= Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby 2.1 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.1
Change owner(s): Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
Ruby
Dne 15.3.2014 15:43, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 01:52:32PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13.3.2014 13:17, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 05:43:16AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
- Original Message -
= Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby
Dne 4.4.2014 19:14, Matthew Miller napsal(a):
[snip]
Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that
matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise.
I'm definitely going through this email every day. Not just to see what
is broken but what is new as well.
Dne 15.4.2014 02:07, T.C. Hollingsworth napsal(a):
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
Rails depends on exact v8
version, which means v8 3.14 must have also their own SCL as part of the SCL.
Stupid question: what in rails depends on v8 exactly?
The only
Dne 15.4.2014 10:21, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 15.4.2014 02:07, T.C. Hollingsworth napsal(a):
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com
wrote:
Rails depends on exact v8
version, which means v8 3.14 must have also their own SCL as part of
the SCL.
Stupid question
Dne 15.4.2014 17:14, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 15.4.2014 10:21, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 15.4.2014 02:07, T.C. Hollingsworth napsal(a):
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jaroslav Reznik
jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
Rails depends on exact v8
version, which means v8 3.14 must have also their own
Dne 28.4.2014 09:52, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a):
On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 23:02 +0100, Andrew Price wrote:
On 24/04/14 15:13, Lennart Poettering wrote:
We probably should make setjmp()-freeness a requirement for
all code included in Fedora.
I love the idea, but ...
Would it be worth
Hi All,
During the last few days, we've been preparing a rebase to Ruby 2.1 in
f21-ruby sidetag and it was just merged back to Rawhide. This rebase
involves libruby soname bump. Updated Ruby carries RubyGems 2.2.
We've tried to rebuilt all binary packages, but some remaining - which
were
Dne 30.4.2014 15:46, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hi All,
During the last few days, we've been preparing a rebase to Ruby 2.1 in
f21-ruby sidetag and it was just merged back to Rawhide. This rebase
involves libruby soname bump. Updated Ruby carries RubyGems 2.2.
We've tried to rebuilt all binary
Dne 2.5.2014 12:50, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 1.5.2014 12:30, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
[hivex]
ruby-hivex-1.3.10-2.fc21.i686 requires ruby(release) = 0:2.0.0
Versioned ruby(release) require should be used only for exceptional
cases. I doubt this is the case.
Fixed this one
Dne 2.5.2014 16:29, Matthew Miller napsal(a):
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:50:36PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Note that just dropping systemd from your images might not be the best
choice, as you then have no owners for a lot of drop-in dirs, which made
be bad for verifying the software installed
Dne 2.5.2014 17:20, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:17:43PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 2.5.2014 12:50, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 1.5.2014 12:30, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
[hivex]
ruby-hivex-1.3.10-2.fc21.i686 requires ruby(release) = 0:2.0.0
Versioned
Dne 15.5.2014 22:49, T.C. Hollingsworth napsal(a):
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
This is usefully detailed, but it’s not always clear what parts need to be
done by “other developers” (to use the template wording), particularly the
two “will need to be
Dne 16.5.2014 19:06, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
On 05/16/2014 06:24 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Dear all,
* Finally, the form used in bugzilla to do SCM requests has been
updated and
now asks for the `Upstream URL`
Why? What is this supposed to be useful for?
AFAIS,
- this pkgdb-URL is
Dne 19.5.2014 07:53, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 10:35:25PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I am curious about this as well. The URL should be taken from RPM and
refreshed with every update of the package. The same applies for Summary and
Description.
Very simply
Dne 22.5.2014 16:17, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
Hi,
another issue with pkgdb2:
Today somebody processed some pending acl-changes, which caused me to
receive PkgDB-acl-change mails, similar to this:
snip
user: silfreed changed point of contact of package: gpsbabel from:
silfreed to: corsepiu
Dne 8.6.2014 19:50, Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi All,
I am in the process of tagging the mass rebuild into f21 it will land
in the next rawhide which due to the size will take some time to
compose, and sync out to the mirrors
The tagging script
Dne 30.5.2014 03:03, T.C. Hollingsworth napsal(a):
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Is it true actually? Last time I was checking the Ruby packages contained
different/modified version of upstream JS files.
AFAICT they're both fine.
rubygem-uglifier
Dne 1.6.2014 11:24, Till Maas napsal(a):
The following packages did not build for two releases (no new build
since 2013-07-25) and will be retired when Fedora (F21) is branched,
unless someone successfully builds them till then. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do
Dne 11.6.2014 20:18, Felix Miata napsal(a):
On 2014-06-11 14:07 (GMT-0400) DJ Delorie composed:
Forcing the users to type a different command name to get exactly the
same functionality only serves to annoy the user.
And in this particular case, the change is from a nice single finger
word
Dne 11.6.2014 17:20, Jan Zelený napsal(a):
On 11. 6. 2014 at 09:02:29, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
This is kind of sentimental, and I think possibly Seth would not have
liked
to have a big deal made of it, but... I guess I'm going to
Hello all,
rubygem-logging 1.7.0 changed license to MIT and (GPLv2 or Ruby or BSD).
Regards,
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Dne 27.6.2014 18:37, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine
juan.o...@miceliux.com wrote:
El Sábado, 28 de junio de 2014 00:31:26 Christopher Meng escribió:
Thank you.
It's better to nofity him about his archaic email address IMO, as he
uses his working
Dne 30.6.2014 10:23, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Actually, bouncing his email address is one think, but it would be nice if
Kanarip can take care about his packages. Looking at Koji [1], it is more
then one year since he
Dne 28.6.2014 05:16, poma napsal(a):
On 27.06.2014 19:03, DJ Delorie wrote:
Welcome to the 21st century!
Do we have different eyes and brains than we did last century?
Because otherwise, excessively wide paragraphs are just as hard to
read now as they were then.
E.g. for me,
Dne 27.6.2014 17:38, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
Hi all,
Rpm 4.12 alpha just got released:
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2014-June/45.html
The plan is to update rawhide to this shiny new version first thing on
Monday morning and babysit as needed (ie the usual drill), but
Dne 30.6.2014 14:48, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27.6.2014 17:38, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
Hi all,
Rpm 4.12 alpha just got released:
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2014-June/45.html
The plan is to update rawhide to this shiny
Dne 30.6.2014 15:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 03:48 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Interesting, it breaks Ruby build it seems:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7090194
Not sure about the reason, though.
Seems the ruby
Dne 30.6.2014 20:59, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
2) The fedora-release-$PRODUCT package (and possibly %post or systemd
snippets therein) will be responsible for the creation and maintenance
of /etc/issue, /etc/os-release and /etc/fedora-release-product (note:
there is no $ there. That's the
Dne 1.7.2014 12:56, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 04:27 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 30.6.2014 15:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 03:48 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Interesting, it breaks Ruby build it seems:
http
Dne 1.7.2014 14:37, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/01/2014 04:26 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 30.6.2014 20:59, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
2) The fedora-release-$PRODUCT package (and possibly %post or
systemd snippets therein
Dne 27.6.2014 18:34, Juan Orti Alcaine napsal(a):
El Sábado, 28 de junio de 2014 00:31:26 Christopher Meng escribió:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
He is or was a Red Hat employee.
No.
Please use this email address:
(...)
Thank you.
Hi Juan,
Have
Hello all,
rubygem-columnize 0.8.9, which is about to land in Rawhide, changed
license from 'GPLv2' to 'Ruby or GPLv2'.
Regards,
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Dne 16.7.2014 07:03, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
On 07/07/2014 06:48 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27.6.2014 18:34, Juan Orti Alcaine napsal(a):
El Sábado, 28 de junio de 2014 00:31:26 Christopher Meng escribió:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to
wrote:
He
Dne 16.7.2014 19:54, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:08:13AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 07/16/2014 03:10 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:00:16AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Well, I contacted kanarip off-list and he responded that somebody
Dne 17.7.2014 11:40, Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2014-07-17 at 10:09 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
Hi,
After using the new pkgdb2 API based fedpkg, I'd like to ask a question here:
Is fedpkg designed to be usable when online only?
Well..
If I cut disable my
Dne 17.7.2014 16:22, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Dear all,
Pkgdb2 is now running for a little over two months. It seems that most of you
like it which is appreciated :)
However, one of the annoyance from Pkgdb1 has not disapeared. Pkgdb2 sends you
an email for each action you do.
So if you
Dne 18.7.2014 13:47, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:59:12PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.7.2014 16:22, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Why is the filter called filter? Isn't filter supposed to remove something?
These filter seems to cause that email is sent, so
201 - 300 of 1970 matches
Mail list logo
