On 26/04/12 00:21, Ken Dreyer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III ti...@math.uh.edu
wrote:
My proposal is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/RevitalizingSponsorshipProposal
I've run this by FESCo, whose response was favorable, so I'm sending
this to a
Is anyone else seeing on F17 TC1 startup a systemd message that iptables failed?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Matthias Runge
mru...@matthias-runge.de wrote:
On 26/04/12 00:21, Ken Dreyer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III ti...@math.uh.edu
wrote:
My proposal is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/RevitalizingSponsorshipProposal
commit 9e707dbe5eee377f289152ff76d627fed0e217fb
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Apr 26 09:50:54 2012 +0100
BR: perl(Data::Dumper) and various minor tweaks
- BR: perl(Data::Dumper)
- Don't need to remove empty directories from buildroot
- Don't need to run
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The easyfix project is now live:
http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
As a new-comers, you will be able to find a list of projects which have
bugs/requests considered to be easy to work on (ie: you do not need a
deep understanding of the project to fix/implement
On 26.4.2012 02:08, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
This approach completely disregards the very common example of I'm an
upstream maintainer of a cool project. I want to package and maintain it
for Fedora. Under your approach, they'd first have to become involved
in other projects before being allowed
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 17:27 -0600, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
On 25/04/12 10:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 09:30 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
Nothing is being taken away, the default is being changed. If you're
using Fedora in production, I presume you're installing
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:03:25 -0500, JLTI (Jason) wrote:
For a while now I have been working on a proposal for some changes to
both the way we elevate packagers to sponsors and what (to a small
extent) sponsors actually do. Please note that this is not a proposal
for any changes to how people
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:45:53 +0200, MR (Matthias) wrote:
On 26/04/12 09:45, drago01 wrote:
Well the idea was that a sponsor is a trusted packer so why would he
demolish all packages?
IMO the bar for being a provenpacker shouldn't be that high. Having
more manpower (as in people that can
Dne 26.4.2012 11:12, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The easyfix project is now live:
http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
As a new-comers, you will be able to find a list of projects which have
bugs/requests considered to be easy to work on (ie: you do not need
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:08:46 -0400, SG (Stephen) wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Why not just drop the sponsorship process and just raise the barrier of
entry for the packaging process instead?
Like having to have been a comaintainer for
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:19 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26.4.2012 11:12, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The easyfix project is now live:
http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
As a new-comers, you will be able to find a list of projects which have
- Original Message -
From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 1:01:51 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:03:25 -0500, JLTI (Jason) wrote:
For
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon pin...@pingoured.fr wrote:
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:19 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26.4.2012 11:12, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The easyfix project is now live:
http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
Dne 26.4.2012 12:25, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:19 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26.4.2012 11:12, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The easyfix project is now live:
http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
As a new-comers, you will be able
Compose started at Thu Apr 26 08:18:45 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.4.0-2.fc17.noarch requires ruby(abi) = 0:1.8
[aeolus-configserver]
aeolus-configserver-0.4.5-1.fc17.noarch
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 01:08, Stephen Gallagher
sgall...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Why not just drop the sponsorship process and just raise the barrier of
entry for the packaging process instead?
Like having to have been a
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:18 +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
I was asked by a upstream to maintain a package for Fedora due to the
high demand it has from Fedora users, unfortunatly I backed down from
the proposal for several purposes:
1) Someone claimed to own the package since 2009, but
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 12:40, Adam Williamson
awill...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:18 +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
I was asked by a upstream to maintain a package for Fedora due to the
high demand it has from Fedora users, unfortunatly I backed down from
the proposal for
On 04/26/2012 01:18 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 01:08, Stephen Gallagher
sgall...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Why not just drop the sponsorship process and just raise the barrier of
entry for the packaging
- Original Message -
From: Nelson Marques nmo.marq...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 2:18:50 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging
No dia 26 de Abril
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/26/2012 01:18 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 01:08, Stephen Gallagher
sgall...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Why not just drop the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/26/2012 06:49 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26.4.2012 12:25, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:19 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26.4.2012 11:12, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
Good news everyone (© Farnsworth),
The
On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 22:31 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
(Note: *DO NOT* run the installer that is on this image. You'll probably
end up with a broken grub. Should be fixed soon)
I've put a test image up at
http://mjg59.fedorapeople.org/Fedora-Mac-EFI-test.iso - this should work
if
As a new-comers, you will be able to find a list of projects which have
bugs/requests considered to be easy to work on (ie: you do not need a
deep understanding of the project to fix/implement it).
The projects are divers and the tickets broad : from fixing typo, add a
link in a template
On 04/26/2012 02:30 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Alec Leamasleamas.a...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/26/2012 01:18 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 01:08, Stephen Gallagher
sgall...@redhat.comescreveu:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +, Jóhann B.
Hello,
This was forwarded to the related maintainers earlier, but an ABI bump
is required for the matio update in F-18.
I don't plan to update it in F-17.
There is a license change involved from LGPL2+ to BSD (2 clauses).
I've tested the rebuilt for vips and it went fine.
Thx
Nicolas
On 04/26/2012 03:02 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:59:30 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
[cut]
What I'm talking about is to tell these great people that there are two
ways to get their app packaged. One way is to become a packager, and so
far this discussion is about that path,.
On 04/21/2012 08:38 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 21/04/12 08:10, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Some update appears to have broken the operation of ypbind recently.
I have a F14 sever that serves /home and implements NIS services (ypserv)
and has been running fine for over a year.
The F16 clients use
On 03/29/2012 10:44 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 03/28/2012 12:31 PM, Caterpillar wrote:
2012/3/28 Terry Barnaby ter...@beam.ltd.uk mailto:ter...@beam.ltd.uk
On 03/26/2012 09:20 PM, J. Randall Owens wrote:
On 03/26/2012 06:05 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Hi,
I am using
MS == Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com writes:
MS There are a few unfortunate sections in the first paragraph already:
Except that they're all true.
users have to go through an almost endless set of steps (which also
needs revision, but that's another topic)
MS Compared with a few years
Hello folks!
Well, the title says it all. Fedora Tour[1], which we recently decided
to make a web application needs web developers. Ironic eh? The thing is:
none of the current Fedora Tour team members have ever done web
development before. We’re learning, but the changes with HTML5, CSS3 and
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
That's not really within the scope of the document. I haven't proposed
lowering the standards for reviewing packages.
I think there is quiet a group of experienced packagers, who do not
consider themselves provenpackers, but who would like to
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:17:09 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
I'm not talking about cooperation in that sense. I'm talking about a
more formalized way for people who want something packaged to find a
packager. As an alternative to force people without informal connections
to become packagers for a
Hi,
I have started to update a bunch of R packages to the latest version of
bioconductor.
Feel free to test and give karma:
F17:
Le Jeu 26 avril 2012 16:32, Paul Wouters a écrit :
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
That's not really within the scope of the document. I haven't proposed
lowering the standards for reviewing packages.
I think there is quiet a group of experienced packagers, who do not
On 04/26/2012 04:20 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
MS == Michael Schwendtmschwe...@gmail.com writes:
MS Forcing sponsors to fulfill such criteria is the wrong way IMO. It
MS may result in even more blanket-approval sponsorships.
I don't happen to agree, but at some point shouldn't
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:49 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
However if I am a newcomer, how can I find the easyfix link from
fedora homepage? Or how can I find it at all?
I am considering marking this as 'easyfix' ;-)
This is a good question though and at the moment I do not have a
very
On 04/26/2012 12:08 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
This approach completely disregards the very common example of I'm an
upstream maintainer of a cool project. I want to package and maintain it
for Fedora. Under your approach, they'd first have to become involved
in other projects before being
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki#How_do_I_get_involved.3F
https://join.fedoraproject.org/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
I agree for the first three, the last one a little less.
Does anyone know if these pages
On 04/26/2012 04:58 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:17:09 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
[cut]
And for the second part, that somebody has a good connection with
upstream, I'm not sure how that will help, *if* not even one packager
is available. Worse if the single person with
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:20:22 -0500, JLTI (Jason) wrote:
MS Forcing sponsors to fulfill such criteria is the wrong way IMO. It
MS may result in even more blanket-approval sponsorships.
I don't happen to agree, but at some point shouldn't sponsors do
something?
Are we talking past eachother?
I got the trailing link wrong, here is same message with link OK (no
punctuation )
On 04/26/2012 04:58 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:17:09 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
[cut]
And for the second part, that somebody has a good connection with
upstream, I'm not sure how that
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:32:17 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
OT? The question here isn't really what submitters do or don't, isn't
it what we could do to improve the process?.
The point is that not all submitters are collaborative, and others don't
seek for sponsors actively. In the needsponsor
commit 9ee0873160cc99ec5265aa08721626713197dc2f
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Apr 26 16:43:55 2012 +0100
Update to 7.0
- Update to 7.0
- Package generates no debuginfo, so avoid creation of debuginfo sub-package
- Add explicit build requirements for the
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:32:17 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
OT? The question here isn't really what submitters do or don't, isn't
it what we could do to improve the process?.
The point is that not all submitters are
The lightweight tag 'perl-AnyEvent-7.0-1.fc18' was created pointing to:
9ee0873... Update to 7.0
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
On 04/26/2012 05:49 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:32:17 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
OT? The question here isn't really what submitters do or don't, isn't
it what we could do to improve the process?.
The point is that not all submitters are collaborative, and others don't
# F17 Final Blocker Review meeting #2
# Date: 2012-04-27
# Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
The second F17 final blocker bug review meeting will be this Friday at
17:00 UTC in #fedora-bugzappers. We'll be running through the beta
- Original Message -
From: Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:13:52 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging
On 04/26/2012 05:49 PM,
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:13:52 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
But isn't part of the problem that
current process forces people which just are interested in a package to
suddenly discover that they are applying to be packagers?
We are in need of _more_ packagers, not less packagers who grab a hundred
MS == Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com writes:
MS Are we talking past eachother? :-/
I don't believe so, no. I do believe that you are reading something
into my proposal that simply is not there, however.
MS What if sponsors _try_ but for some time haven't found anyone who
MS shows enough
Hi,
I don't know what is going on, but from what I see, the f17 repositories
currently seem to contain multiple versions of packages and
binary/src.rpm mismatches:
E.g.:
17/x86_64/os/Packages/i/ibus-table-code-1.2.0.20100305-8.fc15.noarch.rpm
On 04/26/2012 06:37 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
MS == Michael Schwendtmschwe...@gmail.com writes:
I don't believe so, no. I do believe that you are reading something
into my proposal that simply is not there, however.
MS What if sponsors _try_ but for some time haven't found anyone
Currently the f17 building for this package is failed.
See: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=10099
2012/4/26 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de
Hi,
I don't know what is going on, but from what I see, the f17 repositories
currently seem to contain multiple versions of
On 04/26/2012 11:40 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
you can expect the review to
take longer, especially if you make no active efforts to try and find
someone to review it - by mailing the list, offering review swaps,
poking people you know within Fedora, pulling in favours etc.
This is a part of a
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:37:54 -0500, JLTI (Jason) wrote:
MS What if there are sponsors with expertise in special areas, who are
MS available to help'n'sponsor other contributors in such areas only?
That was intended to be covered by the assuming there are
sufficient... language in the
Hi,
W dniu 9 kwietnia 2012 17:46 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
mkkp...@gmail.com napisał:
Hi,
2012/4/5 Robyn Bergeron rberg...@redhat.com:
At the Go/No-Go meeting it was decided to slip the Beta by an additional
[..]
* Blockers (rbergeron, 15:16:41)
If I remember correctly, those were
On 26/04/12 18:50, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Is it possible to upgrade now from F16 to F17 with preupgrade?
Has anyone tried to preupgrade from F16 to F17? Are there any problems
related to UsrMove (or anything else)?
I did it two days ago.
No problems KVM Guest GPT formatted.
2012/4/26 Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com:
On 26/04/12 18:50, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Is it possible to upgrade now from F16 to F17 with preupgrade?
Has anyone tried to preupgrade from F16 to F17? Are there any problems
related to UsrMove (or anything else)?
I did it two days ago.
I doubt anyone would notice, but the above drivers have been retired in
F18. They're all for ancient hardware, and none have been installed by
default since Fedora 9 (with zero complaints, as far as I can tell). I
have no interest in keeping them building anymore.
If someone really desperately
On 26/04/12 16:32, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
That's not really within the scope of the document. I haven't proposed
lowering the standards for reviewing packages.
I think there is quiet a group of experienced packagers, who do not
consider
MR == Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de writes:
MR exactly, I fully agree. I think, we should lower the barrier to
MR become a sponsor, maybe dropping the necessity to become a proven
MR packager first.
I can't quite tell; are you aware that this is the core point of the
proposal I've put
I get an md5 error when I try to make a live usb with fedora's
live-usb creator. Anyone else seen this?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am 26.04.2012 11:18, schrieb Adam Williamson:
Does that imply that new installs will be easily switched from firewalld
to static iptables? I always do new install but I want to keep my firewall
static, with my current iptables script.
Once we actually go to firewalld by default, then yes,
On 26/04/12 20:37, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
That's in the proposal, too.
Ahem, I'm sorry, I must have skipped that.
Regarding activity report: When doing statistics, I'd love
to see the review-status report again. I don't remember when and why it
vanished; it makes work of
On 26/04/12 20:57, Matthias Runge wrote:
Something like that works well in learning environments, why it should
work here?
should read:
... why it shouldn't work here?
--
Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de
mru...@fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 19:49, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com escreveu:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 12:40, Adam Williamson
awill...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:18 +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
I was
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
So the big question is -- where did this break down? How can we update our
documentation to guide people in this direction?
I find bugzilla as the core around which to navigate where things are
in a process difficult and inconvenient. Its emails
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 20:52, Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com escreveu:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
So the big question is -- where did this break down? How can we update
our
documentation to guide people in this direction?
I find bugzilla as the core around which to
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 08:49:32PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 19:49, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com
escreveu:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
BZ718430
So reading that with the meat seeming to come from here:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 21:35, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com escreveu:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 08:49:32PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 19:49, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com
escreveu:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
There will be another outage of fedorahosted.org at
2012-04-27 02:00 UTC that could last around 2 hours.
We will be backing out to our previous hosts until we can work out some
issues with group handling on the new cluster.
Please follow:
On 26/04/12 03:18 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 17:27 -0600, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
Does that imply that new installs will be easily switched from firewalld
to static iptables? I always do new install but I want to keep my firewall
static, with my current iptables
Package perl-Data-Alias in Fedora 17 is now owned by pghmcfc
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-Data-Alias
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
Package perl-Data-Alias in Fedora 16 is now owned by pghmcfc
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-Data-Alias
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
The lightweight tag 'perl-Jcode-2.07-8.fc18' was created pointing to:
9e707db... BR: perl(Data::Dumper) and various minor tweaks
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit e8cce2b129310ea5935a761801f4769f116a8f26
Author: Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com
Date: Thu Apr 26 11:41:27 2012 +0200
- switch off some functions for now, which were defined as private in new
rpm
- rebuild with new rpm-4.10
perl-RPM2-switchofffunctions.patch | 44
The lightweight tag 'perl-Dancer-1.3095-1.fc18' was created pointing to:
5fea57d... 1.3095 bump 810865 bootstrap macro for test only BR
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Data-Alias:
f53a4f654d57671fe0bd2cdcd6974e41 Data-Alias-1.16.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 4a00f3589bef52e0f2499d0c57a9ee7d235bd577
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Apr 26 11:15:13 2012 +0100
Update to 1.16
- Update to 1.16
- Use supported API to put destructor calls on the save stack (the
unsupported way used before was wrong for
Summary of changes:
4a00f35... Update to 1.16 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Summary of changes:
ecf7e75... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_17_Mass (*)
4a00f35... Update to 1.16 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel
The lightweight tag 'perl-Data-Alias-1.16-1.fc16' was created pointing to:
4a00f35... Update to 1.16
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
The lightweight tag 'perl-Data-Alias-1.16-1.fc17' was created pointing to:
4a00f35... Update to 1.16
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
The lightweight tag 'perl-Data-Alias-1.16-1.fc18' was created pointing to:
4a00f35... Update to 1.16
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
pghmcfc has been granted the watchbugzilla acl on perl-AnyEvent (Fedora devel)
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-AnyEvent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
pghmcfc has requested the commit acl on perl-AnyEvent (Fedora devel)
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-AnyEvent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
kwizart has set the commit acl on perl-AnyEvent (Fedora devel) to Approved for
pghmcfc
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-AnyEvent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
kwizart has set the approveacls acl on perl-AnyEvent (Fedora devel) to Approved
for pghmcfc
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-AnyEvent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-AnyEvent:
af64802330543c2fae3ceedc52370738 AnyEvent-7.0.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/345
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/345/0001-Ticket-345-db-deadlock-return-should-not-log-error.patch
Fix description: error log level is set to SLAPI_LOG_TRACE if
DB_LOCK_DEADLOCK is returned from the BDB operations, otherwise
set to
There will be another outage of fedorahosted.org at
2012-04-27 02:00 UTC that could last around 2 hours.
We will be backing out to our previous hosts until we can work out some
issues with group handling on the new cluster.
Please follow:
93 matches
Mail list logo
