This has been orphaned.
- A
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guideline
Hello all,
I wanted to raise awareness of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1965585: this has regressed in
dracut 054 and the pending dracut 055 update
(https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a3ab421a63) does not fix
it.
Seeing as this is a regression affecting several
Seeing as I've moved on from Fedora packaging... :-)
And dogtag-pki no longer depends on python-nss... :-)
I'd like to orphan python-nss. But in case anyone wants it, I'm making this
offer before I officially orphan the package.
There's some context here that Red Hat formerly was the sponsor (
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 4:45 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 26. 01. 21 3:12, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >> 1. Untested changes
> >>
> >> Packager pushes a "simple update" to dist git without checking if it even
> >> builds. It doesn't. Packager has no time to fix this,
Congrats! I can say I've used several of these features and they work
well, thanks for your team's work!
One query inline... :)
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 11:53 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Let me sum up what we - the Copr team - did in 2020:
>
> * We enabled CDN for repos. https://fedora-copr.git
On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:52 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2020-12-02 at 11:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> > There were a number of people interested in helping with reviving the
> > Server WG, myself included. But we don't know how to have that move
> > forward. We've never really had a situa
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 1:21 PM Robbie Harwood wrote:
>
> Matthew Miller writes:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:52:57PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> >> > I completely agree. This is one of the reasons I switched away from
> >> > ubuntu years ago (with its 4 (?) tiers of support + repo
Also, JFTR, I believe I only took over internal maintenance of
python-nss; I am not a maintainer of Fedora python-nss. There is only
one maintainer:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-nss
- Alex
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 2:09 PM Alexander Scheel wrote:
>
> Note that I have no acc
Note that I have no access to upstream python-nss. The entire upstream
community was John Dennis. The last upstream commit was in 2018 and
the commit prior was in 2017. With his departure, there's no viable
path forward for maintaining python-nss upstream; perhaps someone from
Mozilla will take it
I've got a weird one:
Error:
Problem 1: package openssh-ldap-debuginfo-8.3p1-3.fc32.x86_64
requires openssh-debuginfo(x86-64) = 8.3p1-3.fc32, but none of the
providers can be installed
- openssh-debuginfo-8.3p1-3.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
- problem with installed
What Fabio just mentioned was that the current use case for a
build-time only package is invalid. A lot of packages Mikolaj is
trying to get build-time only (via modules) are still maintained by
the Java Maintenance SIG because they're required by other packages.
Allowing them to be build-time onl
Ben,
Can Fedora first-party flatpaks be built from unsigned, untrusted
content outside of the Fedora Repos? Or can they only be built from
content otherwise already present in Fedora? Just curious what
benefits a first-party flatpak has versus an upstream one.
AFAIK, the last Fedora Container doc
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:11 AM Aleksandar Kurtakov
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:46 PM Alexander Scheel wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 8:52 AM Joe Orton wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> >
Hi Joe,
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 8:52 AM Joe Orton wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm writing as the Red Hat engineering manager responsible for Maven and
> Ant in RHEL, and on behalf of Mikolaj Izdebski and Marian Koncek from my
> team. I want to give a broad response to some of the points here:
>
> 1.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 6:27 PM Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > However! This has mostly been a one-man-show, with regular
> > contributions by Mat Booth (whos thankless task is maintaining the
> > Eclipse stack) and the Dogtag PKI team (thanks guys
- Original Message -
> From: "Randy Barlow"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:18:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular
> Buildroot
>
> On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 12:56 -0400, Randy Barlow wro
- Original Message -
> From: "Neal Gompa"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 2:36:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 8:50 AM Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 10,
If you go to any modular repo:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/modules/eclipse
And click on "modules" in the path at the top, it takes you to:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/projects/modules/%2A
Which lists them all.
- Original Message -
> From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek"
> To:
- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 9:18:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:08:56PM -04
- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 4:31:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:20:21PM -0400, A
- Original Message -
> From: "Stephen Gallagher"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 2:59:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:56 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
> >
> > I have to ask,
> > given
Hi all,
I filed a releng ticket about a week ago [0] but haven't heard back.
Is there any action I can take myself to move this along?
Thanks,
Alex
[0]: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8637
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
T
- Original Message -
> From: "Dave Dykstra"
> To: "Alexander Scheel"
> Cc: "Jan Pazdziora" , "Development discussions related
> to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 4:45:06 PM
> Subject: Re: "javaewah" (w
- Original Message -
> From: "Dave Dykstra"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Jan Pazdziora"
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 3:53:37 PM
> Subject: "javaewah" (was Re: Over 500 orphaned packages seeking new
> maintainers)
>
> I don't see an answer to Jan's que
> Where this fails is where there's duplication of efforts. Take slf4j as an
> example. mizdebsk maintains it in one of his various modules (it looks like
> the javapackages module). We maintain it in the SIG as an ursine package so
> things like Dogtag and a lot of other things don't break. When y
ages seeking new maintainers
>
> On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 10:55, Aleksandar Kurtakov
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:48 PM Alexander Scheel
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >>
- Original Message -
> From: "Christopher"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Fabio Valentini"
> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 6:14:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Over 500 orphaned packages seeking new maintainers
>
> The reason I'm confused is because AFAIK last time jpackage-utils /
> javapackages-tools also was part of the set of
> packages causingproblems and javapackages-tools was picked up by the
> Stewardship SIG (or so I believe) so I'm
> surprised to see it go away again now.
One of the SIG's 3 revie
28 matches
Mail list logo
