Vít Ondruch wrote:
> It is interesting to see such response from somebody who appears to be
> maintainer of Qt. Don't we ship 3 parallel installable version of Qt?
We indeed ship major (first digit!) versions of Qt as parallel-installable
versions. They are for all practical purposes different li
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/16/2013 07:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Sorry, this has nothing to do with FPC yet. RPM/YUM/DNF should
>> first provide reasonable support. For example this issue [1]
>> could take us closer as a first approximation.
>>
>>
Dne 17.10.2013 10:05, Jiri Moskovcak napsal(a):
On 10/17/2013 09:15 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
To be honest, the Kernel is the last package, which should be paraller
installable, since you can run just one kernel at time.
Yeah, admins will love that, when after updating the kernel the
machine w
On 10/17/2013 09:15 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.10.2013 01:15, Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Sorry, this has nothing to do with FPC yet. RPM/YUM/DNF should first
provide reasonable support. For example this issue [1] could take us
closer as a first approximation.
Vít
[1] https
Dne 17.10.2013 01:15, Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Sorry, this has nothing to do with FPC yet. RPM/YUM/DNF should first
provide reasonable support. For example this issue [1] could take us
closer as a first approximation.
Vít
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=84524
Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Sorry, this has nothing to do with FPC yet. RPM/YUM/DNF should first
> provide reasonable support. For example this issue [1] could take us
> closer as a first approximation.
>
> Vít
>
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845247
Parallel-installing multiple v
Tom Hughes wrote:
> That hasn't stopped us saying that they don't provide a good experience
> to Fedora users however, and that it is better to repackage things as
> RPMs so that our users only have to deal with a single interface to
> installing and updating packages and that they will get a set o
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> Ok then, talk to FPC about this. Personally I'd be against creating the wild
> west from Fedora itself and I'd rather like to have have it in COPRs. Fedora
> should keep its high standard of Software packaging (which usually doesn't
> apply for
On 16/10/13 13:57, Matthew Miller wrote:
We have a mantra of "upstream! upstream! upstream!" for software development
and patches. In the olden days, we didn't do that for packaging, because
there was no consistent upstream packaging at all (just the occasional
upstream shipping terrible distro-
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:04:55AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > I won't speak for Michael, but I think the answer is no. COPRs fills a
> > need, but it's _too_ wild west (no package signatures, for example). We
> > need to support multiple language runtimes and native upstream packaging
> > *in* Fe
On 16. 10. 2013 at 10:46:01, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 16.10.2013 10:04, Jan Zelený napsal(a):
> > On 15. 10. 2013 at 09:40:41, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:15:26PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> >>> Not to be only negative here, take a look at the COPR initiative, I
> >>> expec
Dne 16.10.2013 10:04, Jan Zelený napsal(a):
On 15. 10. 2013 at 09:40:41, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:15:26PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
Not to be only negative here, take a look at the COPR initiative, I expect
it will solve the problem you are talking about by offering exter
On 15. 10. 2013 at 09:40:41, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:15:26PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > Not to be only negative here, take a look at the COPR initiative, I expect
> > it will solve the problem you are talking about by offering external
> > repositories that will be easi
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:15:26PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> Not to be only negative here, take a look at the COPR initiative, I expect
> it will solve the problem you are talking about by offering external
> repositories that will be easily reachable from Fedora but won't be a part
> of the Fedor
On 13. 10. 2013 at 22:19:16, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> > as you might remember I issued a call for RFEs on this list during the
> > spring. The participation was not bad at all, we have collected so many
> > data that it took u
On 13. 10. 2013 at 03:05:20, Alek Paunov wrote:
> On 04.10.2013 15:34, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > If you have any other questions, comments or notes regarding the document,
> > feel free to to use this list for the discussion.
>
> Where (list threads, wikis, sources) one should seek more details about
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 10:19:16PM -0700, Michael Stahnke wrote:
>> Developers don't do deployments with RPM...at least not inside Fedora.
>> Anything sane is actually against Packaging Guidelines. So that
>> becomes a problem, and developer
On 10/14/2013 05:19 AM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
Hello everyone,
as you might remember I issued a call for RFEs on this list during the spring.
The participation was not bad at all, we have collected so many data that it
took us several months to
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 10:19:16PM -0700, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> Developers don't do deployments with RPM...at least not inside Fedora.
> Anything sane is actually against Packaging Guidelines. So that
> becomes a problem, and developers skip it. If developers (or
Can you elaborate on "anything
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> as you might remember I issued a call for RFEs on this list during the spring.
> The participation was not bad at all, we have collected so many data that it
> took us several months to discuss and process it.
>
> Now I have som
On 04.10.2013 15:34, Jan Zelený wrote:
If you have any other questions, comments or notes regarding the document,
feel free to to use this list for the discussion.
Where (list threads, wikis, sources) one should seek more details about
the DB aspects of the plan, e.g.:
* A1: Delta metadat
21 matches
Mail list logo