On 09/08/2018 07:43 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for
updates-testing:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544
Just as a quick heads up, this was accepted as a Freeze Exception in
yesterday's blocker review m
vte and gnome-terminal have a bunch of downstream patches and require
special handling because of that. Rishi is fixing them and they are coming
later as well.
Kalev
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:55 Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> What about gnome-terminal & vte291? They seem to be stuck on 2.28 release.
>
>
What about gnome-terminal & vte291? They seem to be stuck on 2.28 release.
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:45 PM Kalev Lember wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is i
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember wrote:
> >
> > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for
> > updates-testing:
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544
> >
> > --
> > Kalev
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember wrote:
>
> OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for
> updates-testing:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544
>
> --
> Kalev
Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or
OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for
updates-testing:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544
--
Kalev
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to de
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 07:17:29PM -0400, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
> >Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series
> >for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what
> >we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is
> >to go fro
On Thu, 06 Sep 2018 11:33:20 -0700, you wrote:
>On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people
>> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test.
>> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific chan
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people
> >> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test.
> >> So I think it's reasonable for
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people
>> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test.
>> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME spe
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 20:42 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>
> Also, Fedora is much more than Workstation now. There is server,
> cloud, and other editions. We shouldn't circumvent our processes for
> some collection of packages important for one edition only.
There's no 'circumvention' being discu
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 01:21:52PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 12:56 PM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME
> > > > mega-update. Th
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people
> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test.
> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly
> state a request and expectation f
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:13 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > > My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden
> > > stated in a written process and schedule fo
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29
>> > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA her
On Thu, 6 Sep 2018 at 11:02, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29
> > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden
>> stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If
>> it was important enough to get 3.30 o
- Original Message -
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
>
> > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29
> > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here?
>
>
> If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:50 PM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
>
> > We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update, but that
> > stopped, I assume because it felt like kind of rote bureaucracy rather than
> > helpful, since i
Dne 6.9.2018 v 01:59 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that
>> essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get
>> visibility across teams and externally. For be
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
>
> > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29
> > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here?
>
> If 3.29 is not what GNOME folk
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that
> essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get
> visibility across teams and externally. For better or for worse, our
> Change list is a starting poi
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:50 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
> We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update, but that
> stopped, I assume because it felt like kind of rote bureaucracy rather than
> helpful, since it was basically the same every time. Maybe it's useful after
> all to hel
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29
> Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here?
If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta,
why are we hearing about it o
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 05:04:46PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still
> at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a
> bit of catching up to do.
We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 12:56 PM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME
> > > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please
> plan to
> > > land the me
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 11:19 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
> > Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :)
> >
> > We are quite a bit behin
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 22:15 +0530, Parag Nemade wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
> > > Mon
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote:
> >
> > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME
> > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to
> > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is
> > ena
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
>> Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :)
>>
>> We are quite a bit behind wi
>> As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
>> Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :)
>>
>> We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still
>> at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a
>> bit of catching
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 16:19, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME
> mega-update.
So you'd rather we ship GA with early pre-release builds of GNOME that
have had little-to-no testing? From a downstream point of view I'm not
going to fix t
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
> Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :)
>
> We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still
> at 3.28.x or at various stage
Hi all,
As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since
Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :)
We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still
at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a
bit of catching up to d
34 matches
Mail list logo
