Re: Shouldn't we have process for removing zombie packages?

2020-09-18 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 18. 09. 20 v 12:37 Petr Pisar napsal(a): > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:42:00AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> This is not about nagging maintainer for the purpose of nagging them. >> > Filing the requests en mass is exactly nagging for nagging. This might be misunderstanding

Re: Shouldn't we have process for removing zombie packages?

2020-09-18 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 18. 09. 20 v 10:24 Petr Pisar napsal(a): > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 09:09:51PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 17. 09. 20 v 18:29 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): >>> Well, many maintainers don't touch packages that keep working and don't >>> need updates or bugfixes. >

Re: Shouldn't we have process for removing old packages?

2020-09-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 17. 09. 20 v 18:29 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 12:39:28PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Looking at rubygem-sinatra-rabbit [1], I wonder if we should not have >> process for removing "zombie" packages. >> >> The issue with this pa

Shouldn't we have process for removing old packages?

2020-09-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Looking at rubygem-sinatra-rabbit [1], I wonder if we should not have process for removing "zombie" packages. The issue with this package is that while it keeps building, it is very likely not working. The `%check` suite is disable for ages already. Upstream is dead. I know I could open BZ

Orphaning rubygem-erubis

2020-09-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi, I have orphaned rubygem-erubis. It is dead upstream for almost 10 years and it is FTBFS with every major version of Ruby. There is available rubygem-erubi, which is properly maintained and most of the projects already switched. The only remaining dependency in Fedora is rubygem-asciidoctor,

Re: Proposing an EPEL packaging SIG

2020-09-14 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 14. 09. 20 v 15:01 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 14. 09. 20 v 12:03 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 10:35:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> Dne 14. 09. 20 v 10:11 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): >>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:50

Re: Proposing an EPEL packaging SIG

2020-09-14 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 14. 09. 20 v 12:03 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 10:35:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 14. 09. 20 v 10:11 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): >>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:50:45AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> Reading th

Re: Proposing an EPEL packaging SIG

2020-09-14 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 14. 09. 20 v 10:11 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:50:45AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Reading this proposal and with the EPEL8 experience, where there was not >> even wiki page, where I could state that I don't care about EPEL and I

Re: Proposing an EPEL packaging SIG

2020-09-14 Thread Vít Ondruch
Reading this proposal and with the EPEL8 experience, where there was not even wiki page, where I could state that I don't care about EPEL and I had to reply into every BZ independently, wouldn't it make sense to move EPEL into its own dist-git namespace? I guess that in the CVS days, having EPEL

Re: Discussion: unixODBC - move unversioned *.so files back to unixODBC-devel package

2020-09-11 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 11. 09. 20 v 9:48 Florian Weimer napsal(a): > * Tom Hughes via devel: > >> On 11/09/2020 07:13, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: >> >>> There seemed to be no big reason for moving the libraries to the >>> main package in the past, so I consider f34 as a good candidate for >>> such a change. It would be

Re: Manual intervention required: broken /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/resolv.conf for F33 early adopters

2020-09-11 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 10. 09. 20 v 17:32 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a): > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 9:24 am, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi Michael, >> >> Could you please provide more details? This is content of my >> nsswitch.conf: >> >> >> ~~~ >> >> $ gr

Re: The Future of the Java Stack (also regarding ELN and RHEL)

2020-09-11 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 11. 09. 20 v 11:03 Hans de Goede napsal(a): > > > On 9/11/20 10:16 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > >> Another, more concrete example: core Ant doesn't have any dependencies >> beyond JDK. It is easy to build and maintain, yet very functional. On >> the other hand, full Ant with all the optional

Re: The Future of the Java Stack (also regarding ELN and RHEL)

2020-09-11 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 11. 09. 20 v 8:43 Petr Pisar napsal(a): > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 09:59:05PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> For Maven packaging the appeal of Modularity is clearly the privatization of >> the dependency tree, which obviously undercuts the ecosystem of packages. >> > You are

Re: Manual intervention required: broken /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/resolv.conf for F33 early adopters

2020-09-10 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi Michael, Could you please provide more details? This is content of my nsswitch.conf: ~~~ $ grep mdns4_minimal /etc/authselect/user-nsswitch.conf hosts:  files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns myhostname ~~~ How that happened? From what version of what package it happened? Why

Re: F34 Change proposal: Remove support for SELinux runtime disable (System-Wide Change)

2020-09-09 Thread Vít Ondruch
Generally, I would appreciate if the proposal was more readable to casual Fedora user/developer. I don't think there is clearly described the current state and what is going to be changed. Also, there is a lot of unclear terminology, e.g. I don't have idea what are "LSM hooks". "Migrate users to

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: domcleal

2020-09-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 02. 09. 20 v 17:19 Robbie Harwood napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch writes: > >> Hi Robbie, >> >> I wonder if you had some intentions with the packages, > If you're asking if I plan to take them, I do not. Thx for clarification. Since the first ticket was rubygem- it just

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: domcleal

2020-09-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
maintainers might be interested to take over your rubygem-terminal-table, because this is the dependency chain: rubygem-unicode-display_width <= rubygem-terminal-table <= rubygem-jekyll Vít > > --Greg > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 3:38 AM Vít Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.co

Re: Fedora 33 blocker status

2020-09-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 01. 09. 20 v 19:54 Tom Hughes via devel napsal(a): > On 01/09/2020 18:29, kevin wrote: > >> Just to make sure folks know, the retrace server being down is not this >> teams fault, it's ours (infrastructure). We planned to just have it down >> for a week or less when moving it to RDU, but it

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: domcleal

2020-09-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi Robbie, I wonder if you had some intentions with the packages, be cause at lest the 3 down bellow looks to be required by other packages and they are now in danger of being removed from Fedora. Adding on CC Pavel, Dan and Greg who might be interested in some of them. Vít Dne 01. 09. 20 v

Re: [HOWTO] Keep using Rawhide after branching

2020-08-28 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 28. 08. 20 v 19:09 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:51 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 25. 08. 20 v 16:25 Petr Menšík napsal(a): >>> No, unfortunately the key is there, but the package is incomplete. >>> >>> If you have enabled gpg si

Re: [HOWTO] Keep using Rawhide after branching

2020-08-28 Thread Vít Ondruch
; 1. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-repos/pull-request/76 > 2. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-repos/pull-request/77 > > > On 8/25/20 12:16 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 25. 08. 20 v 11:40 Petr Menšík napsal(a): >>> Hi Vít, >>> >>> Unfortun

Re: Does ELN SIG have some issue tracker?

2020-08-26 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 25. 08. 20 v 19:09 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): > Hi, Vit, > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:21 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Looking at the ELN SIG page [1], there is no contact information, no ML, >> no issue tracker. I would like to discuss bootstrapping

Re: [HOWTO] Keep using Rawhide after branching

2020-08-25 Thread Vít Ondruch
by normal upgrade. > > Filled bug #1872248 for it. It should finally work without user even > fiddling with gpg keys manually. Is there some pressure to keep users > from using rawhide? > > 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872248 > > On 8/17/20 1:42 PM, Vít

Does ELN SIG have some issue tracker?

2020-08-25 Thread Vít Ondruch
Looking at the ELN SIG page [1], there is no contact information, no ML, no issue tracker. I would like to discuss bootstrapping issues such as [2], but there is no place to provide any feedback. Is this group working under cover? (Using the minimization tracker [3], where a lot of ELN stuff

Re: Proposed Modular Policy for Fedora ELN

2020-08-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 20. 08. 20 v 20:17 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > > However, ELN has a mission to be a bridge to future RHEL and that > distribution has committed to default streams as a business necessity > for multiple reasons (among them support lifecycle which is much > harder to address via non-modular

Orphaned rubygem-dealayed_job{,_active_record}

2020-08-20 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi, I don't have any use for rubygem-dealayed_job and rubygem-dealayed_job_active_record, therefore I orphaned them. Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

2020-08-20 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi Jeff, Dne 27. 07. 20 v 14:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 27. 07. 20 v 12:25 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >> Dne 24. 07. 20 v 21:01 Jeff Law napsal(a): >>> On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 20:52 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> The LTO break Ruby on various p

Orphaned rubygem-{rubypants,org-ruby}

2020-08-18 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi, I have orphaned rubygem-rubypants and rubygem-org-ruby, because I have not any use for these. Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

[HOWTO] Keep using Rawhide after branching

2020-08-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Just as a reminder to all Rawhide users, this is the easiest way to keep using Rawhide after branching: ~~~ $ sudo dnf update fedora-gpg-keys $ sudo dnf update fedora-repos --release 34 ~~~ Unfortunately, there has been no progress on [1] during past months. Vít  [1]

Re: failed to do fedpkg import

2020-08-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 16. 08. 20 v 15:53 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > > Also I'm not sure why you're running import again, when the package > already exists. `import` is the best way how to upload sources + add/remove patches from dist-git. I would suggest everybody to `import` instead of `new-sources`/`upload`.

Re: A few questions about rpmdev-bumpspec tool

2020-08-13 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 13. 08. 20 v 12:41 Qiyu Yan napsal(a): > Hello all, > > I have some problem with rpmdev-bumpspec recently. > > In the latest version of rpmdevtools, rpmdev-bumpspec has changed to > use time+date in the changelog it generates[1], while the packaging > guidelines have not been updated

Re: LTO and the F33 mass rebuild

2020-08-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 11. 08. 20 v 18:43 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 10:06:49PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On Sun, 2020-08-09 at 12:02 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: >>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 12:03 AM Jeff Law wrote: So I've done two passes over the F33 build failures here:

Orphaned rubygem-wikicloth

2020-08-07 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi everybody, I don't have any use for rubygem-wikicloth, therefore I orphaned the package. Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: bpeck/jenkins-continuous-infra.apps.ci.centos.org's vtk-8.2.0-18.eln103 failed to build

2020-08-06 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 06. 08. 20 v 11:26 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): > Hi, > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:01 AM Orion Poplawski wrote: >> So, I'm getting one of these messages every couple of hours and I'd >> really rather not. Who do I need to talk to about it? > You can talk about it with the ELN SIG [1] or

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal (late): Enable EarlyOOM

2020-08-05 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 04. 08. 20 v 21:38 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a): > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:31 am, Chris Murphy > wrote: >> Should we go back to the old workaround for F33? Madness for one more >> release? And then drop the madness once there's a dnf solution? > > We could, but we have installed so many

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal (late): Enable EarlyOOM

2020-08-05 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 04. 08. 20 v 20:58 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel napsal(a): > On 04.08.2020 16:45, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> I think the "don't use autoremove" is better suggestion ATM, because I >> don't really want to keep earlyoom on the system in case there is >> systemd-oomd or w

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal (late): Enable EarlyOOM

2020-08-04 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 04. 08. 20 v 16:05 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel napsal(a): > On 04.08.2020 15:48, Michael Catanzaro wrote: >> In the meantime, if you want to keep earlyoom, don't use autoremove. > sudo dnf mark install earlyoom > I think the "don't use autoremove" is better suggestion ATM, because I don't

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal (late): Enable EarlyOOM

2020-08-04 Thread Vít Ondruch
Yesterday, I have updated my Rawhide and wondered why `dnf autoremove` would want to remove earlyoom just to discover that soft dependency in earlyoom was dropped [1] and hence nothing requires earlyoom and DNF is free to remove this package (and it is possibly not installed anymore on upgraded

Re: Fedora 33 Mass Rebuild

2020-08-04 Thread Vít Ondruch
Mohan, Could you please check the script filling out the FTBFS tickets is doing the right thing? There was reported this ticket against Ruby: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865667 But I have rebuild Ruby already on Friday 31st:

Re: module build: BuildrootError: could not init mock buildroot

2020-08-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 02. 08. 20 v 0:21 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 04:05:20PM +0200, Jun Aruga wrote: >> Hi, >> Sometimes once per a few times, I faced the following weird build >> error when building Ruby modules. >> Did you see it? Known issue? >> >>

Re: Minimal Mock's buildroot

2020-08-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Quite some stuff from the list are "soft" dependencies of rpmbuild, e.g. the compression algorithms. May be we should have discussion if we should have BR on the decompression library, or if the BR could be autogenerated. Vít Dne 02. 08. 20 v 22:06 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): > As part of >

Orphaned rubygem-fast_gettext

2020-07-29 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi, I have orphaned rubygem-fast_gettext, because I have no use for it, neither anything else depends on it. VĂ­t ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

Orphaning ruby-ldap

2020-07-28 Thread Vít Ondruch
I don't have any use for ruby-ldap package. It is not in the best condition. While it probably works, it does not follow the best practices and it would deserve to be replaced by rubygem-ldap if somebody considering to keep it in Fedora. Anyway, I have orphaned it. VĂ­t

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

2020-07-27 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 27. 07. 20 v 12:25 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 24. 07. 20 v 21:01 Jeff Law napsal(a): >> On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 20:52 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> The LTO break Ruby on various platforms. >>> >>> >>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/task

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

2020-07-27 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 26. 07. 20 v 13:44 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 29. 06. 20 17:49, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 29. 06. 20 v 17:21 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): >>> js-jquery1 nodejs-sig, patches, vondruch   Fedora 30 >>> js-jquery2 vondruch

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

2020-07-27 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 07. 20 v 21:01 Jeff Law napsal(a): > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 20:52 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> The LTO break Ruby on various platforms. >> >> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47582573 >> >> vs >> >> https://k

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

2020-07-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
The LTO break Ruby on various platforms. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47582573 vs https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47621733 (Note these are my experimental builds testing single test case). The only difference is redhat-rpm-config 162-1.fc33 =>

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Just FTR, I don't think I am going to reveal too much saying that for RHEL9, the sentiment is (at least in the context of Ruby, Node.js and Python) that we are very likely not going to use default streams. Plain old RPMs do mostly the same job. In this context, I'd be more than happy if the

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

2020-07-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 07. 20 v 14:25 Petr Pisar napsal(a): > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: >> There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. >> >> The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as >> highlights our plans for Fedora 34. >>

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-22 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 22. 07. 20 v 14:55 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 1:06 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Is this just about the specific URL or also about the "Naming Policy"? > The Naming Policy is not currently under discussion in this proposal. > Only the U

Re: Fedora in 6th gear

2020-07-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Thx to everybody who submitted the change proposal. It is nice that people follow the process instead of just pushing something into Fedora without sharing with wider audience. Vít Dne 16. 07. 20 v 19:52 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > In the FESCo meeting summary email sent out today

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-13 Thread Vít Ondruch
Is this just about the specific URL or also about the "Naming Policy"? I am asking, because I already had a lot of arguments about the branching on this list and various different places but this guideline still insist that "using upstream major versions as branches is recommended". This is not

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

2020-07-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
packaging. Sorry. Vít Dne 02. 07. 20 v 13:42 Alexandre de Farias napsal(a): > In fact, I am not at this time. > > On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 15:38 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi Alexandre, >> >> Thank you for your offer. I just wonder, are you sponsored into >>

Re: rawhide - glibc/pthreads/... - broken pending mass rebuild?

2020-07-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
I just met something which might be of similar nature. Recent FF 78.0-1.fc33.x86_64 fails to start with older glibc: ~~~ $ firefox XPCOMGlueLoad error for file /usr/lib64/firefox/libxul.so: /usr/lib64/firefox/libxul.so: undefined symbol: pthread_getattr_np, version GLIBC_2.32 Couldn't load

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

2020-07-01 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi Alexandre, Thank you for your offer. I just wonder, are you sponsored into packager group? Vít Dne 29. 06. 20 v 17:57 alexandrebfar...@gmail.com napsal(a): > I'm interested in helping with those NodeJS packages.  > > --  > Alexandre de Farias / etinin > > On Mon, Jun 2

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

2020-06-29 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 29. 06. 20 v 17:21 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > js-jquery1 nodejs-sig, patches, vondruch   Fedora 30 > js-jquery2 vondruch    Fedora 30 > js-sizzle  nodejs-sig, patches, vondruch   Fedora 30 > I was ranting about js-jquery (and js-sizzle

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make nano the default editor

2020-06-26 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 26. 06. 20 v 15:17 Ben Cotton napsal(a): > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:14 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 01:59:39PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >>> Which is better? default or defaults? I don't have a preference. >> I went with "-defaults" in this case

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Use %make_build and %make_install macros

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
I wonder if there is PR with the implementation somewhere or is this just dry theoretical discussion O:-) Vít Dne 19. 06. 20 v 23:11 Ben Cotton napsal(a): > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseMakeBuildInstallMacro > > == Summary == > This change will update all spec files in Fedora

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 06. 20 v 17:04 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:45 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 24. 06. 20 v 15:47 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): >>> On 24. 06. 20 14:41, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> Having python27 and python36 modules is fail, because thes

Re: Fedora Packager Dashboard available for testing

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 06. 20 v 11:24 Josef Skladanka napsal(a): > First of all, thanks for the feedback! > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:28 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Would it be possible to change the "reset" to something like "set >> all/unset all". When I wanted

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 06. 20 v 15:47 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 24. 06. 20 14:41, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Having python27 and python36 modules is fail, because these should be >> 2.7 and 3.6 streams of python module. > > Oh. We are so sorry for the failure. Could you please report is

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 20. 06. 20 v 23:40 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:25 PM John M. Harris Jr > wrote: >> On Saturday, June 20, 2020 4:42:17 AM MST Neal Gompa wrote: >>> TL;DR benefits of modularity for Fedora: >>> >>> * Automating build chains for producing artifacts >>> * Straightforward

Re: Bodhi 5.4.0 in production

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 23. 06. 20 v 15:08 Clement Verna napsal(a): > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 12:32, Vít Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > Dne 23. 06. 20 v 9:23 Hans de Goede napsal(a): > > Hi, > > > > On 6/22/20 9:53 AM, Clement Vern

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 23. 06. 20 v 14:02 Josh Boyer napsal(a): > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:56 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: >> On 23. 06. 20 13:43, Josh Boyer wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:36 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 23. 06. 20 13:29, Josh Boyer wrote: >> (It*may* be possible to automatize this,

Re: Fedora Packager Dashboard available for testing

2020-06-24 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 24. 06. 20 v 9:31 Josef Skladanka napsal(a): > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:15 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: >> RFE: would it be possible to make the icons in the header clickable >> (the part where there's the ladybug, zapf, blocks, wrench, etc), so that >> we'd get redirected to

Re: Bodhi 5.4.0 in production

2020-06-23 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 23. 06. 20 v 9:23 Hans de Goede napsal(a): > Hi, > > On 6/22/20 9:53 AM, Clement Verna wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have just deployed Bodhi 5.4.0 >> (https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/releases) in production. We >> were running 5.2.2 so that deployment brings the improvement and bug >>

Re: RHEL 9 and modularity

2020-06-19 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 18. 06. 20 v 21:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:34 PM John M. Harris Jr > wrote: >> The issues I've seen so far affect both Fedora and RHEL, but have gotten a >> bit >> better in Fedora. For example, a major concern that has been much worse in >> Fedora than

Re: Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: Default animated background for Fedora Workstation

2020-06-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 16. 06. 20 v 14:46 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a): > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:03 pm, Kamil Paral wrote: >> The person proposing this Change should supply some video showcasing >> this, or a very detailed description, otherwise people will have very >> varying ideas of how this works and looks.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Fedora-Retired-Packages

2020-06-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 16. 06. 20 v 14:38 Christopher Engelhard napsal(a): > I can't speak to the implementation of this, but I am in favour of the > approach in general, with one caveat: I think it is important to > implement this in a way that makes it possible for users to keep > *individual* retired packages

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Fedora-Retired-Packages

2020-06-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 17. 06. 20 v 9:15 Till Hofmann napsal(a): > > On 6/16/20 9:56 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Also, I wonder what is wrong with "dnf autoremove", which is supposed to >> remove unused leaf packages, which were not explicitly installed? > On my system, it remove

Re: Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: Distribute .repo files for modular repositories from a separate package

2020-06-17 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 17. 06. 20 v 0:21 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 16. 06. 20 11:57, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Not mentioned that weak dependencies are disabled in Mock. > > I don't understand why would the user need fedora-repos-modular > automatically pulled into mock when they install fedora-re

Re: Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: Distribute .repo files for modular repositories from a separate package

2020-06-16 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 16. 06. 20 v 11:04 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 16. 06. 20 10:03, Panu Matilainen wrote: >> Yeah it's a hard dependency of fedora-release-common. I suppose one >> possibility would be adding a recommends on fedora-repos-modular to >> fedora-release-common, but weak dependencies have an

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Fedora-Retired-Packages

2020-06-16 Thread Vít Ondruch
I have sympathy for such proposal, but the implementation does not respect all the possible corner cases. 1) It does not reflect, that this is not just about retired packages, but also (or mainly?) about subpackages, which we don't retire. 2) The point (1) is closely related to -debuginfo

Re: [ELN] Opt out python2.7 from ELN

2020-06-10 Thread Vít Ondruch
You should probably open PR modifying this file: https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input/blob/master/configs/view-eln.yaml But I would expect that somebody else from the ELN provided more prompt guidance on questions like these ... Vít Dne 08. 06. 20 v 16:49 Miro Hrončok

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Let's standardize the way to disable tests during RPM build?

2020-06-09 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 09. 06. 20 v 13:33 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 09. 06. 20 12:21, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> That won't be different for what was the original question here, i.e. >> conditionally disable tests. bconds are what we have for better or >> worse. >> >> And reall

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Let's standardize the way to disable tests during RPM build?

2020-06-09 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 09. 06. 20 v 12:12 Nicolas Mailhot napsal(a): > Le mardi 09 juin 2020 à 12:08 +0200, Vít Ondruch a écrit : >> Just FTR, we have bootstrapping guidelines >> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bootstrapping >> > Those suffer from > 1. the hor

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Let's standardize the way to disable tests during RPM build?

2020-06-09 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 05. 06. 20 v 17:24 Tomas Orsava napsal(a): > On 6/5/20 4:46 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 04:38:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: >>> On 05. 06. 20 16:26, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 04:10:20PM +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote: > Hi, > I

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

2020-06-05 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 05. 06. 20 v 9:52 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Ben Cotton wrote: >> == Summary == >> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the >> upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This >> change proposal replaces that policy with one where compiler selection

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

2020-06-04 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 04. 06. 20 v 11:25 Igor Raits napsal(a): > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 10:56 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 03. 06. 20 v 19:29 Igor Raits napsal(a): > >> On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >>> Other possibility is to modify

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

2020-06-04 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 03. 06. 20 v 19:29 Igor Raits napsal(a): > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not > > sure > > if that would be better. Or is there already some functionality which > > would e

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
-self-destruct-pkg() ~~~ we use in fedora-obsolete-packages? Vít Dne 03. 06. 20 v 18:23 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Because was bitten by this and there is not clear guideline, I have > tried to draft something here: > > https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/988 > >

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Because was bitten by this and there is not clear guideline, I have tried to draft something here: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/988 Vít Dne 03. 05. 18 v 12:10 Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a): > In libvirt we recently deleted a driver for the legacy Xen toolstack. > > This

Re: Bodhi: "how to install" is supposed to work?

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 03. 06. 20 v 11:03 Alessio napsal(a): > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 10:54 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 02. 06. 20 v 9:32 Alessio napsal(a): >>> In Bodhi there is a dnf command in the "How to install" section, in >>> order to install the package to test. Som

Re: Has something changed with RPMS?

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 02. 06. 20 v 19:26 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a): > On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 12:44:17PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Panu Matilainen: >> >>> Lets start with the basics: >>> - is sqlite even involved - it will only be used on rawhide builds if >>> mock bootstrap is used >>> - does it make a

Re: Bodhi: "how to install" is supposed to work?

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 02. 06. 20 v 9:32 Alessio napsal(a): > In Bodhi there is a dnf command in the "How to install" section, in > order to install the package to test. Something like: > > sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020- > 81a3b3df7d > > Is it supposed to work? Because every

Re: Upcoming fedoraproject Datacenter move reminder and plans

2020-06-03 Thread Vít Ondruch
Just wonder, will there be any convenient way to remind me that the service is down for a reason? E.g. redirect to status page. It would be probably harder for all the CLI utilities we are using, but maybe something which should be addressed as well. Vít Dne 02. 06. 20 v 18:40 Kevin Fenzi

Orphaning invokebinder + coro-mock

2020-06-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi, Since JRuby was retired, I am orphaning invokebinder and coro-mock, which used to be dependencies of JRuby. I don't think anything else depends on them. Also, they were not touched in several years. VĂ­t ___ devel mailing list --

Re: The price of FHS

2020-05-23 Thread Vít Ondruch
It would be possible to install individual RPMs into paths such as: ~~~ /pkgs/programA_version1 /pkgs/libX_version1 contains ~~~ but I wonder how would you imagine the glue above this structure to make the programA_version1 to use the libX_version1? Vít Dne 22. 05. 20 v 21:50 Paul Dufresne

Re: FTBFS bug not reassigned

2020-05-18 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 17. 05. 20 v 1:25 Benjamin Lowry napsal(a): > I recently adopted flatbuffers, which was orphaned due to an open FTBFS > in F32 [1]. I've fixed the spec, rebuilt, and made an update in bodhi, > but I'm unable to close the FTBFS bug because it hasn't been reassigned > to me. What should I do?

Orhpaning rubygem-inflecto

2020-05-15 Thread Vít Ondruch
This package is deprecated upstream, nothing depends on it and I have no use for it, therefore I orphaning the package. VĂ­t ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Re-Launching the Java SIG

2020-05-14 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 14. 05. 20 v 11:53 Michal Srb napsal(a): > Hello, > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:57 PM Felix Schwarz > mailto:fschw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote: > > > Am 12.05.20 um 12:32 schrieb Ty Young: > > Right, I figured it was some Fedora policy and not up to you. I > suppose I > >

Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-13 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 13. 05. 20 v 15:08 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 13. 05. 20 14:45, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> But then everybody felt strong that it is not possible, because if there >> was not official body approving this, that could be end of the world. So >> now, when we have t

Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-13 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 14:22 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): > Hi, > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:19 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 11. 05. 20 v 19:40 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Stephen Gallagher

Re: Retired packages with maintainers

2020-05-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 20:26 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 12. 05. 20 v 14:51 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): >> On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >>> Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all >>> maintainers >>> of retired pa

Re: Retired packages with maintainers

2020-05-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 14:51 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all >> maintainers >> of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all

Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 10:18 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 11. 05. 20 v 19:40 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Stephen Gallagher >> wrote: >>> During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting >>> sit

Re: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy

2020-05-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 11. 05. 20 v 19:40 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a): > Hi, > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting >> situation for the first time: Four FESCo members voted in favor (+1) >> of a measure and five FESCo

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

2020-05-07 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 06. 05. 20 v 20:39 clime napsal(a): > On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 13:21, Fabio Valentini wrote: >> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:37 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> >>> Dne 05. 05. 20 v 18:37 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): >>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:06 PM T

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

2020-05-06 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 06. 05. 20 v 16:15 Robbie Harwood napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch writes: > >> Dne 05. 05. 20 v 21:26 Robbie Harwood napsal(a): >>> Tomas Tomecek writes: >>> >>>> Thank you all for raising all the questions and concerns. >>>> >>>> B

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

2020-05-06 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 06. 05. 20 v 13:20 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:37 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 05. 05. 20 v 18:37 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): >>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:06 PM Tomas Tomecek wrote: >>> >>> Hi Tomas, >>>

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >