On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:36, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This thread is serving as a source of requirements (although
(snip)
20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
To me that's the all point of this
process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need and then look at
the different options.
Do we *really* *really* need to compete with other full featured git
forges on features? The
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:37:36AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 9:29 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 03:22:25PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > > >To me
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 06:10, Damian Ivanov wrote:
>
> Maybe now that RH is part of IBM they have changed their short sighted view
> of not collaborating on a better build system like OBS.
That is looking for a boogeyman under the bed to blame something that
has a long long history of not
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
wrote:
> (snip)
>
> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > To me that's the all point of this
> > process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need and then look at
> > the different options.
> >
>
> Do we *really*
On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 09:43 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Also AIUI fedpkg chain-build doesn't work except in
> Rawhide, although I'm not sure why that is?
It doesn't work in stable because you need to create buildroot
overrides for each dependency before you can proceed with building the
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:06:22PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a final
>requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing and
>maintain it on the different forges (and it should be feasible with
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Damian Ivanov wrote:
>Maybe now that RH is part of IBM they have changed their short sighted
>view of not collaborating on a better build system like OBS. As I recall
And ... you lost me right there...
Pierre
That's one of the big reasons I like Red Hat. You guys rock! :-)
On Wednesday, January 29, 2020, 5:14:18 AM EST, Andrew Haley
wrote:
On 1/27/20 3:13 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
> N.B.: I'd like to thank the Red Hat JVM team for being solid in
> their Fedora execution. But they maintain
Le 28/01/2020 à 10:03, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit :
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you have to write your own
>That is looking for a boogeyman under the bed to blame something that
>has a long long history of not happening. Ever since OBS has been out,
>there has been a yearly 'why isn't Fedora moving to OBS' thread
It has always been a bad management decision to not change.
Ever since OBS has been out
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 05:14, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> On 1/27/20 3:13 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
> > N.B.: I'd like to thank the Red Hat JVM team for being solid in
> > their Fedora execution. But they maintain only the JVM, and not
> > the rest of the Java ecosystem. :-)
>
> Thank you.
>
> One
2020(e)ko urtarrilaren 29(a) 15:56:08 (CET)-(e)an, Clement Verna
-(e)k hau idatzi zuen:
>On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
>
>wrote:
>
>> (snip)
>>
>> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
>> > To me that's the all point of this
>> > process, let's put down what
Maybe now that RH is part of IBM they have changed their short sighted view
of not collaborating on a better build system like OBS. As I recall back
than it was already able to bootstrap on centos and fedora and build
packages and the only argument against it was legacy support with mock /
koji
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 9:29 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 03:22:25PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > >To me that's the all point of this process, let's put down what we
> > >*really*
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:07 AM Julen Landa Alustiza
wrote:
>
> Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a final
> requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing and
> maintain it on the different forges (and it should be feasible with all of
>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 4:05 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> And ... you lost me right there...
> Pierre
That's too bad. Even If it's sounds harsh it's the reality.
It has been discussed before and there was no technical reason not to.
Just someone going for a short term solution.
Maybe it is
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:07:55AM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 09:43 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Also AIUI fedpkg chain-build doesn't work except in
> > Rawhide, although I'm not sure why that is?
>
> It doesn't work in stable because you need to create buildroot
>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 03:22:25PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> (snip)
>
> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> >To me that's the all point of this process, let's put down what we
> >*really* *really* need and then look at the different options.
> >
>
> Do we
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:35 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This thread is serving as a source of requirements
- Original Message -
> From: "Stephen John Smoogen"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 8:47:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Java Dev Group and Fedora Quality
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 05:14, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> > On 1/27/20 3:13 PM,
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 09:46, Damian Ivanov wrote:
>
> >That is looking for a boogeyman under the bed to blame something that
> >has a long long history of not happening. Ever since OBS has been out,
> >there has been a yearly 'why isn't Fedora moving to OBS' thread
>
> It has always been a bad
On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 15:56 +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
> wrote:
>
> > (snip)
> >
> > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > > To me that's the all point of this
> > > process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need
Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a final
requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing and
maintain it on the different forges (and it should be feasible with all of the
rest of our strange ACLs on dist-git)
On pagure side, now that our
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 3:30 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:06:22PM +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> >Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a
> final
> >requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing
> and
>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 03:56:08PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > To me that's the all point of this
> > process, let's put down what we
* Neal Gompa:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:07 AM Julen Landa Alustiza
> wrote:
>>
>> Per git ref acls is not a common thing on git forges. If this is a final
>> requirement, we should start analyzing the viability of implementing and
>> maintain it on the different forges (and it should be
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:18, Pierre-Yves Chibon
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 03:56:08PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
> > wrote:
> >
> > (snip)
> >
> > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > > To
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 18:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:38, Clement Verna
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:18, Pierre-Yves Chibon
> wrote:
> >>
>
> >> these heroics related to pagure?
> >>
> >> If not, I'm not sure what is the point you were
Richard W.M. Jones kirjoitti 27.1.2020 22:35:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 06:43:36PM +0200, Markku Korkeala wrote:
I think it's Perl where IIRC the package can be configured
as a bootstrap package (by setting an RPM variable), built
that way, the dependencies are then built, then the perl
package is
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 7:18 AM Remi Collet wrote:
> There are different:
>
> * Changelog is for end user
> * Git log is for package maintainer
I completely agree with this distinction. We're creating more "noise"
for end users if we end up adding all the "whoops" commits into the
%changelog.
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:18, Julen Landa Alustiza
wrote:
>
>
> 2020(e)ko urtarrilaren 29(a) 15:56:08 (CET)-(e)an, Clement Verna <
> cve...@fedoraproject.org>-(e)k hau idatzi zuen:
> >On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
> >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> (snip)
> >>
> >> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an,
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:23, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:35 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>> >> >
>>
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:56, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 15:56 +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza <
> jla...@fedoraproject.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> > >
Rex Dieter kirjoitti 28.1.2020 16:57:
Markku Korkeala wrote:
Hi,
sorry if this a newbie question, I tried to search this
but did not find good documentation on this problem.
I'm in the process of upgrading the clojure package to
next version, which has new dependencies. These dependencies
On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 16:17 +0100, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>
> 2020(e)ko urtarrilaren 29(a) 15:56:08 (CET)-(e)an, Clement Verna
> -(e)k hau idatzi zuen:
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:23 Julen Landa Alustiza
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna
Damian Ivanov wrote:
> But it's not the only CVE fixed with Qt 5.14.1
> The point is that there is other software using Qt which doesn't start
> with K even though K works just fine with 5.14 by the experience of other
> distributions.
Bumping Qt versions is... a fairly difficult process in
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:38, Clement Verna wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:18, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>>
>> these heroics related to pagure?
>>
>> If not, I'm not sure what is the point you were trying to make for this
>> thread.
>
>
> My point is that we have to dedicate a team
Julen Landa Alustiza writes:
> (snip)
>
> 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
>> To me that's the all point of this
>> process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need and then look at
>> the different options.
>>
>
> Do we *really* *really* need to compete with
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 01:18:48 +0100, Jiri Hladky wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Jirka,
> I have a simple package for review. It's called practrand - a Software package
> for the Randon number generation & testing
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461
I see that it hasn't been taken up for
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:26:56PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Here is an initial (albeit randomly generated) proposal of X and Y:
>
> severity CRITICAL/HIGH MEDIUM LOW
> X 2 4 6
> Y 2 4 6
In RHEL, low impact
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 17:19 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:23, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:35 AM Iñaki Ucar
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar
> wrote:
> >> >>
On 29. 01. 20 22:49, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:26:56PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Here is an initial (albeit randomly generated) proposal of X and Y:
severity CRITICAL/HIGH MEDIUM LOW
X 2 4 6
Y 2
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:52:53PM -0500, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Julen Landa Alustiza writes:
>
> > (snip)
> >
> > 20/1/29 14:49(e)an, Clement Verna igorleak idatzi zuen:
> >> To me that's the all point of this
> >> process, let's put down what we *really* *really* need and then look at
> >>
Pierre-Yves Chibon writes:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:51:29PM +0100, Dan Čermák wrote:
>> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
>>
>> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
>> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
>> > maintain 100+
Hello, Fedora has an approved security policy since September 2018 [0]:
If a CRITICAL or IMPORTANT security issue is currently open
against a package, or a security issue of lower severity has been
open for at least 6 months, four weeks before the branch point a
procedure similar to
Hello Rex,
>So, we (kde-sign, Qt maintainers) generally update strategically where it
>makes sense to warrant the time investment in doing so.
I understand.
Also that some people contribute it in their free time/or paid time
(but not mandatory to contribute),
which of course means a lot.
I
According the procedure for retired packages, I'm announcing my intention to
take ownership of checkstyle, checkstyle-maven-plugin, and
google-http-java-client. They are all retired as far as I can tell.
___
devel mailing list --
Hi Bill,
Am 30.01.20 um 07:25 schrieb Bill Chatfield via devel:
> According the procedure for retired packages, I'm announcing my intention to
> take ownership of checkstyle, checkstyle-maven-plugin, and
> google-http-java-client. They are all retired as far as I can tell.
Welcome to Fedora -
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> My idea was that within half a year, it should be wither fixed or CLOSED
> as WONTFIX or UPSTREAM. If we don't agree, I'm completely fine making it
> 12 months or even ignore such bugs in the policy entirely.
I don't see how it is an improvement to close security fixes that
On 1/30/20 8:32 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Miro Hrončok wrote:
>> My idea was that within half a year, it should be wither fixed or CLOSED
>> as WONTFIX or UPSTREAM. If we don't agree, I'm completely fine making it
>> 12 months or even ignore such bugs in the policy entirely.
>
> I don't see how
On 1/30/20 3:19 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:26:56PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>> Here is an initial (albeit randomly generated) proposal of X and Y:
>>
>> severity CRITICAL/HIGH MEDIUM LOW
>> X 2 4 6
>> Y
Hi,
I took js-jquery-file-upload package to save js-query , I updated [1]
but we still need update nodejs-multimatch [2], nodejs-p-limit [3] and
nodejs-lodash [4] at least !
To update nodejs-p-limit, we need nodejs-p-try which isn't in Fedora,
here is the package review request [5]
[1]
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:06:40PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> My main concern is that we have been coming up with 'standard'
> proposals for 20 years and we can't seem to get more than any 4
> maintainers to agree to what that means... even if they do the same
> work in Debian/SuSE/Arch
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:10:17PM -0500, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen writes:
>
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> >>
> >> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> >>
> >> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> >> > It's possible
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:26:43AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:06:40PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > My main concern is that we have been coming up with 'standard'
> > proposals for 20 years and we can't seem to get more than any 4
> > maintainers to
Le mardi 21 janvier 2020 à 16:34 +, Leigh Griffin a écrit :
Hi,
> On behalf of the CPE team I want to draw the communities attention to
> a recent blog post which you may be impacted by:
> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/git-forge-requirements/
Requirements:
1. the url to the
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:51:29PM +0100, Dan Čermák wrote:
> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
>
> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> > maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:51:29PM +0100, Dan Čermák wrote:
> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> > * CVE bugs should autoclose when a package is rebased
>
> I don't think this is a good idea as you should actually check that this
> update fixes the CVE.
If we collect the data that version X fixes
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:04:32AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:51:29PM +0100, Dan Čermák wrote:
> > "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> >
> > > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work.
On 1/27/20 3:13 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
> N.B.: I'd like to thank the Red Hat JVM team for being solid in
> their Fedora execution. But they maintain only the JVM, and not
> the rest of the Java ecosystem. :-)
Thank you.
One (perhaps) rather minor point in the middle of this important
discussion:
> On 28 Jan 2020, at 11:32, Guido Aulisi wrote:
>
> Il giorno mar 28 gen 2020 alle ore 10:04 Richard W.M. Jones
> ha scritto:
>>
>> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
>> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
>> maintain 100+
> On 28 Jan 2020, at 10:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you have to write
> On 29 Jan 2020, at 00:26, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 28 January 2020 10:03:09 CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> * committing to git should build the package
>>
>> Is there a reason why this wouldn't be the case?
>
> Please no. Sometimes you just fix a typo or add a comment
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 00:08, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>> >
>> > This thread is serving as a source of requirements (although it has
>> > meandered dramatically away from that)
>>
>> When I
But it's not the only CVE fixed with Qt 5.14.1
The point is that there is other software using Qt which doesn't start with
K even though K works just fine with 5.14 by the experience of other
distributions.
Though all software is affected by security issues by using unpatched Qt.
Affected by
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795978
Bug ID: 1795978
Summary: Upgrade perl-CDB_File to 1.01
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-CDB_File
Assignee: mmcki...@umich.edu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792699
--- Comment #8 from Mark McKinstry ---
I initially didn't link them but tried multiple times to link them afterwards,
but it never worked.
When 1.01 was released, I linked that update but its not posting here.
The 1.01 update is at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792699
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CDB_File-1.00-1.fc32 |perl-CDB_File-1.00-1.fc32
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796014
Bug ID: 1796014
Summary: Upgrade perl-Path-Tiny to 0.112
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Path-Tiny
Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793916
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793917
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1796106
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795910
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796014
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
olysonek commented on the pull-request: `Remove old cruft` that you are
following:
``
Hi! Can we get this merged please?
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Encode-Detect/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793917
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Link ID||Github
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795978
Mark McKinstry changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792699
Mark McKinstry changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jples...@redhat.com
--- Comment #7
olysonek commented on the pull-request: `Drop Group tag` that you are following:
``
Igor has already handled this. Closing.
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel
olysonek closed without merging a pull-request against the project:
`perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random` that you
are following.
Closed pull-request:
``
Drop Group tag
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random/pull-request/1
___
olysonek commented on the pull-request: `Drop Group tag` that you are following:
``
Igor has already handled this. Closing.
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel
olysonek closed without merging a pull-request against the project:
`perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA` that you
are following.
Closed pull-request:
``
Drop Group tag
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795982
Bug ID: 1795982
Summary: Upgrade perl-Image-ExifTool to 11.85
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Image-ExifTool
Assignee: tcall...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793916
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Link ID|
olysonek commented on the pull-request: `Don't remove buildroot in %install`
that you are following:
``
Hi! Can you take a look at this please?
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum/pull-request/1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792699
--- Comment #9 from Jitka Plesnikova ---
perl-CDB_File-1.01 is not build for F32
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796036
Bug ID: 1796036
Summary: perlbrew-0.88 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perlbrew
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796036
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792699
--- Comment #10 from Mark McKinstry ---
Jitka,
Thanks for building it at
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4bf83642a1 .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 22:45:22 UTC
From 447766d02dd318a98bee7d878e0981e154ef9095 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 22:45:17 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 22:49:36 UTC
From 3f40d1a255f7fb8cdee398c4f8440bb7b5a772ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 22:49:29 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2020-01-30 00:59:03 UTC
From 00effc81e0d855c7e30959b6bba26073b45f2c69 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 30 2020 00:58:58 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2020-01-30 00:57:56 UTC
From 83d4e589dc97d5049ad4684b562f057bf2093b60 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 30 2020 00:57:51 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796214
Mark McKinstry changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
---
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 22:32:55 UTC
From db8dd765c3110e815feca27e7f6dc75deda337b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 22:32:50 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 23:24:03 UTC
From 1ca7f924af0ccd5e9af8381441b3690e3ab4422c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 23:23:59 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 23:56:28 UTC
From afb44d7d3207a52f60ef6df79aa20886c29f33ca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 23:56:23 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796214
Bug ID: 1796214
Summary: perl-CDB_File-1.02 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-CDB_File
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796214
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1656402
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1656402=edit
[patch] Update to 1.02 (#1796214)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
Notification time stamped 2020-01-29 22:30:05 UTC
From cafab39cf5008bd840d54ffa99a8b32a102a93e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jan 29 2020 22:30:00 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
