php-libvirt package became orphan

else wants to take ownership instead, please arrange your desire to own the package with Remi and Ville. The package has been already orphaned as I no longer maintain it for Fedora, however I still maintain it for upstream. Thanks, Michal -- Michal Novotny minov...@redhat.com, RHCE, Red Hat

Self Introduction: Michal Novotny (clime)

Hello fedora developers! I am a new package maintainer from the Czech Republic and I would like to introduce myself briefly. My main open-source projects I was (or still am) involved in are: - lit (https://github.com/clime/lit) a programming language prototype - motionpaint

Re: SLA of Copr and changes in future

I must agree that "fedorainfracloud" also sounds to me like the more stable variant out of the two (without any previous historical knowledge). clime On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:51:21 +0100 > Michael J Gruber

Re: Package Reviews Statistics

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Parag Nemade wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Raphael Groner > > wrote: > >> Can that information be used to award

Re: Package Reviews Statistics

The truth is that the script for the review awards will need to be written almost from a scratch and it seems to be a longer shot from where we are now. As a lazy programmer, I need to cheer for the stats being sent to the list :). clime On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kevin Fenzi

Package Reviews Statistics

Hello, as a new Fedora Infrastructure apprentice, I am currently working on this first infrastructure ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/3748. Basically, I updated an old script that collects stats on packages reviews present on Bugzilla. I wonder if this information

Re: Package Reviews Statistics

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Raphael Groner wrote: > Can that information be used to award badges? There's an old open issue to > implement badges for doing package reviews. Maybe get in contact with the > badges team. >

Re: Copr f26 with pkgconfig

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Didier Fabert wrote: > Hi there, > > I'm unable to build netdata package for f26 on copr. The error, in file > root.log.gz, was about pkgconfig: > > Error: package pkgconf-pkg-config-1.2.1-1.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with > pkgconfig <

Re: COPR and new chroot naming

nk that makes more sense as well. P.S. Adding devel to the recipient list so that more people can comment. > Vít > > Dne 21.2.2017 v 10:05 Michal Novotny napsal(a): > > Hello folks, > > We have quite recently changed naming of rawhide chroot to fXY in COPR and &g

Re: COPR and new chroot naming

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:00:15 +0100 > Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> > > wrote: > > >

COPR auto-rebuilds on pagure commits

Hey, I'd like to announce that we now support package auto-rebuilding on a new commit(s) into a Pagure repository. Apart from having your package repo hosted in Pagure, you just need to enable firing of fedmsg notifications for new commits by clicking a single checkbox in 'Hooks' section...well,

Re: COPR auto-rebuilds on pagure commits

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 03:13:43PM +0100, Michal Novotny wrote: > > I'd like to announce that we now support package auto-rebuilding on a new > > commit(s) into a Pagure repository. Apart fro

Re: Copr && Rawhide -- no "rolling updates" workflow

The description of Kevin is very precise. I am additionally thinking about implementing user option to rebuild all project packages for a new target when added. So when f27 is added, user could click one button to launch rebuild of all his packages for this target. Basically, this allows us to be

COPR rawhide repo links

Dear rawhide users, if you have enabled a COPR repo in the last three months (since the beginning of December last year till yesterday), then it points to fedora-$releasever-$basearch. You can reenable it by using `dnf copr enable ` to get .repo file pointing to actual fedora-rawhide chroot in

New copr-frontend release

Hello, I am sending these release notes also to fedora-devel list (and not just copr-devel list as usually) because they contain information about upcoming Fedora branching and what features COPR provides to move the set of packages from your rawhide chroots into the newly branched ones. We have

Re: fedpkg new-sources broken?

Hello, I was able to successfully use 'fedpkg new-sources' (still from f25) right now. clime On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Right now, I can't build updates or new packages, because "fedpkg > new-sources" is getting stuck (for more than 15

Re: Fedora, apps, and the Flatpak opportunity

I am no flatpack expert, but I think that really any container technology in question should be just a porter of an rpm or set of rpms and there should (could) be packaged ansible scripts that are able to setup and spawn those containers e.g. in OpenShift or just on a host machine through ssh or

mock's dual bootstrapping enabled by default for existing copr projects

Hello, while working on another thing, I noticed that when use_bootstrap_container project option was introduced (Wed Jun 14 this year), it was introduced as enabled for existing COPR projects at that time. That was not exactly intended as this feature is experimental. Enabling this option makes

Re: COPR strategy

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Kamil Dudka <kdu...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, August 22, 2017 1:51:44 PM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > > Hey Kamil, > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Kamil Dudka <kdu...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday

modularity: (my) expectations vs. reality

I would like to publicly note that I had completely different idea about this project first time I have encountered it at the last Flock. My idea was that the project will target runtime rather than build-time and will try to provide a set of packages that would be able to e.g. spawn and run an

Re: modularity: (my) expectations vs. reality

Hello Langdon, On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Langdon White <lang...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 2:40 PM Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> I would like to publicly note that I had completely different idea about >

Review swap

Hello, I have implemented a set of macros specific for module development. I would be happy to review your package if you can review mine: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461769 clime ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: 610 emails for a branch import in dist git?

Can you, please, show the emails or just one of them? On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Whoever set up that service, seriously? > > Why would I receive 610 emails for activity in "epel7"? For packages with > a longer git history, it will likely be

Re: CI projects in Copr

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > It's easier on implementation. That's the main reason. I generally > > believe that > > what's easier on implementation is better. > > It's maybe easier on the copr side, but not for the copr users ... > > If

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hello, On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Petr Stodulka <pstod...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 4.9.2017 19:27, Michal Novotny wrote: > > I might contact you for more information, but alright, if you feel the > custom script is more convenient, > > then I am all f

Re: COPR strategy

Hello Matthias, On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Matthias Runge <mru...@matthias-runge.de> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 05:17:56AM +0200, Michal Novotny wrote: > > Hello, > > > > we will have soon a planning meeting that should determine a more > long-term >

COPR strategy

Hello, we will have soon a planning meeting that should determine a more long-term strategy and bring us to a team agreement on what COPR currently is and what it should be in half a year or so. I would like to kindly ask for some input here on the devel list to find out what the actual

Re: New copr-frontend release

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> On Monday, August 21, 2017 10:42:00 AM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: >> > Hello Ke

Re: New copr-frontend release

Hello, On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Monday, August 21, 2017 10:42:00 AM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > > Hello Kevin, > > > > sorry for the late response caused by me being on vacations. > > > > On Sat

Re: New copr-frontend release

Hello Kevin, sorry for the late response caused by me being on vacations. On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote: > Hi, > > Michal Novotny wrote: > > - "Follow Fedora branching" project switch that (if enabled) makes COP

Re: f27 builds in COPR fail without logs

Hello Alexander, you haven't missed anything. It is just that there hasn't been mock release yet with f27 configs added. It is in upstream already but not yet released. If it is not in Fedora until the end of the week, then we can probably temporarily provide our own substitute repo configs.

Re: COPR strategy

Hello Mikolaj, On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski <mizde...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/22/2017 11:17 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > >> - it would be great, if there is a possibility to trigger rebuilds on > >> dependent packages, like rebuild requi

Re: COPR strategy

Hey Kamil, On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote: > On Tuesday, August 22, 2017 9:04:24 AM CEST Matthias Runge wrote: > > - the ability to directly upload srpms; that is, one can store spec > > files etc. on the local machine. I'm undecided, if integrating a >

Re: New copr-frontend release

Hey Kevin, On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote: > Michal Novotny wrote: > > - Batch package rebuilding ("Rebuild all" button in Packages view) so > > that you can rebuild all your packages in the new chroots. > >

Re: COPR strategy

ly could work just inside one project if the batch building would be done separately from the main project repo and only be included if successful. Ok, thanks for this input. I think we can do something about this. > kind regards, > Rudolf Kastl > > > > 2017-08-22 17:15 GMT+02:00

Re: f27 builds in COPR fail without logs

Eventually, a new version should pop up here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=mock You can give it Karma when it appears so that it reaches Fedora repos a bit faster. On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Michal. Is

Re: CI projects in Copr

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 5:18:39 PM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > > We are considering the options here and so far the most convenient > method (at > > least from the implementat

Re: CI projects in Copr

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:43:08 AM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > I'm curious why you insist

Re: CI projects in Copr

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Right, this is cool. The problem is that the upstream repo would need > > to be configured to provide a public message that something has been > > changed > > in it (i.e. new release) so the question is how to

Re: CI projects in Copr

9.2017 09:47, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Friday, September 1, 2017 12:16:32 PM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Marc Dequènes (Duck) <d...@redhat.com> > >>> On 09/01/2017 01:28 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > >>>> But I t

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hello Petr, On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Petr Stodulka wrote: > > > On 24.8.2017 08:04, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 1:46:46 PM CEST Miroslav Suchý wrote: > >> Do you use Copr for building packages for nightlies? For building > packages > >>

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hello Martin, On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Martin Sehnoutka wrote: > Hi, > > I'm using Copr for build on commit for dnssec-trigger project: > https://github.com/InfrastructureServices/dnssec-trigger-fedora > It's using tito. > > But I'm looking for a different way of

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hello Pavel, On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thursday, August 31, 2017 3:48:21 PM CEST Michal Novotny wrote: > > a) you need an additional db field. you need to have more inputs in SCM > tabs > > when one has a

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hello Gerd, On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > It's easier on implementation. That's the main reason. I generally > > believe that > > what's easier on implementation is better. > > It's maybe easier on the copr side, but not for the copr

Re: CI projects in Copr

Hey Marc, On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Marc Dequènes (Duck) <d...@redhat.com> wrote: > Quack, > > On 09/01/2017 01:28 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > > > But I think an off-line talk might be the best. Depends on you. > > I can understand you don't want this threa

COPR: usage of http:// in python client

Hello, we have found out that http://copr.fedoraproject.org was used as default API endpoint if no copr_url was specified for CoprClient initialization. This is now fixed in the latest version of python-copr (python-copr-1.84) and we recommend updating to that version. Also we have decided to

Re: CI projects in Copr

We have finished the SCM source type implementation. You can read more in this blog post: https://clime.github.io/2017/10/24/COPR-SCM.html Thank you for the feedback! clime On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Sep 5,

long waiting times for COPR jobs

Hello, lately, COPR pending job queues are holding jobs for pretty long time (even hours). This is a buggy behaviour and we will be doing our best to fix this issue in the following days. Thank your for your patience COPR team ___ devel-announce

is there logstash alternative in Fedora?

Hello, I am looking for an alternative for Java logstash application (not in Fedora) that can parse logs (e.g. httpd access.log) and collect stats about number of occurrences for a given search pattern (basically it can e.g. group by IP and give number of lines for each IP and then post it to

copr nomenclature

Hello, lots of times, I see name "copr", "Copr", or "COPR" used somewhere but it's almost never used correctly for the given context. So I would like to make it clear, what's the correct way to write it down to get the meaning right. "Copr" or "COPR" = service providing space for community

Planned Outage: COPR BACKEND upgrade - 2018-01-16 09:00 UTC

Planned Outage: COPR BACKEND upgrade - 2018-01-16 09:00 UTC There will be an outage starting at 2018-01-16 09:00 UTC, which will last approximately 0.5 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2018-01-16

Re: COPR + pagure + rpkg HOWTO?

Hello Richard, On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I would like to manage a COPR via SCM (in this case pagure) > > I'm assuming using rpkg would be a good way to do this? Or should I forget > that and just use plain git+copr-cli? > > There is OK

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Hello, On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 02/09/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:02:10PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>>

Re: Python2 stub packages now in EPEL stable

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > [For those who don't read epel-devel, this is a duplicate of a message > also posted there.] > > The initial set of stub python2-* packages I created have now made their > way to EPEL6 and EPEL7 stable, so packages

Re: Usefulness of `copr mock-config ` feature?

Hello, On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Michael Šimáček wrote: > On 2018-02-13 11:47, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > >> Sorry, I wanted to CC fedora devel before, forwarding. >> >> Pavel >> >> On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 10:54:55 AM CET Pavel Raiskup wrote: >> >>> Because we are

Re: Usefulness of `copr mock-config ` feature?

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Michael Šimáček <msima...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> On 2018-02-13 11:47, Pavel Raiskup wrote: >> >>> Sorry, I wanted to C

Re: Usefulness of `copr mock-config ` feature?

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 10:54:48 AM CET Michal Novotny wrote: > > Hello Pavel, > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> > wrote: > &

Re: Usefulness of `copr mock-config ` feature?

Hello Pavel, On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Pavel Raiskup <prais...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 10:15:42 PM CET Michal Novotny wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hello,

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

I must agree with Kevin that taking every single commit message and putting it into changelog without further tweaking might just produce lots of redundant and not really desired lines in the output. But I think something still can be done. When you invoke `rpkg tag` (the same goes for `fedpkg

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

I feel PRs are better for this sort of stuff. Mainly because people are informed why exactly this change is made, they can read the guidelines and then merge the change when they are sure they understand it. It helps spreading knowledge and keeping community involved. Python team did it very well

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 10:17 +0100, Michal Novotny wrote: > > I feel PRs are better for this sort of stuff. Mainly because peo

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

Hello, On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:56 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:54 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen > wrote: > >> I should test some larger package sets to see how well rpmbuild-order >> scales too... >> > > BTW are there any tarballs of all the fedora spec files available

Re: dnf history - change in how rpmdb checksum is computed

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 3:40 PM Michal Novotny wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 1:25 PM Jeff Johnson wrote: > >> This simply is not true. >> >> Whatever "rpm format" means, historically RPM itself has always gone to >> some lengths not to expose

Re: dnf history - change in how rpmdb checksum is computed

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 1:25 PM Jeff Johnson wrote: > This simply is not true. > > Whatever "rpm format" means, historically RPM itself has always gone to > some lengths not to expose E: to users to simplify the endless fog of > dependency hell clutter. > Yeah, something which is eluding my

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:07 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:59 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > Hello devel list, > > > > this is a request for comments for a recent proposal I filed at releng > tracker: > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7445 > > > > In short, package managers on

Re: fedora-messaging for Copr - what do you need?

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 10:33 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > As part of migration of fedmsg from ZMQ to AMQP, I would like to revisit > what is Copr sending to fedmsg. > > Right now we are sending: > > 'build.start': { > 'what': "build start: user:{user} copr:{copr}" \ >

Re: fedora-messaging for Copr - what do you need?

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:52 AM Jeff Johnson wrote: > Changing Fedora infrastructure to use AMQP brings up a different usage > case. > > Build systems tend to eventually invoke rpmbuild to do the actual build. > > Would you like rpmbuild to, say, send time stamped progress messages > directly

Re: fedora-review — do we have a maintainer?

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > f-r currently fails to build (#1603956), it has a bunch of bugs open [1] > and many issues and unhandled pull requests in the upstream repo [2, 3]. > The last upstream commit was 2 years ago. > > f-r has is

Re: fedora-review — do we have a maintainer?

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 3:47 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > I was actually thinking about this some time ago. If there's a > > responsive fedora-review maintainer who can respond to people's > > questions and complains (because if we start running it for every > > package build and show it in Bodhi,

Re: Automating Package Review (Was: fedora-review -- do we have a maintainer?)

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 5:04 PM Stephen Gallagher > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM Michal Novotny wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew

copr-frontend: fix for webhook secrets leakage

Hello, there have been security problem fixed in copr-frontend today. Basically by forking, you could get to webhook secrets of an original project being forked. Also the integration page where you can insert pagure api token was actually available under certain URL if you knew how this URL

Re: Self Introduction

I cannot take your review right now but i just want to say: Welcome! Michal On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:11 AM Manas Mangaonkar wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Manas,i am a Computer Engineering student at the University of > Mumbai. > > i recently began packaging with my first package being this

Fedora Copr can now flag commits and pull requests from src.fp.o

Hello, in addition to auto-rebuilding feature from Fedora DistGit ( src.fedoraproject.org), we have added possibility to flag commits and pull requests after an auto-rebuild. This works not only with Fedora DistGit but with any pagure instance (e.g. also

experiencing dnf Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' or ''updates'

Hello, I am occasionally experiencing the following error in my day-to-day dnf use: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' or Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates' I've had that happened even in local mock builds. Do you also experience this error upon dnf operations

Re: experiencing dnf Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' or ''updates'

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> On 20.7.2018 06:25, Michal Novotny wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am occasionally experiencing the following error in my day-to-day dn

Re: Intel's Clear Linux optimizations

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 8:08 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Manas Mangaonkar > wrote: > > No offense but can you kindly rephrase whatever you said.Its kinda > difficult > > to decipher as your sentences seem to contradict. > > > I need installation instructions to

Re: dnf history - change in how rpmdb checksum is computed

I would like to see dnf history not being messed up by direct installations with `rpm -i`. While `dnf history` is a great feature, it would be even greater if the related functionality was implemented directly in rpmdb and both rpm and dnf used that db. Meaning that any consistency checks would

Re: experiencing dnf Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' or ''updates'

On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 8:03 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 07/20/2018 11:15 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 20.7.2018 19:56, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On 07/20/2018 03:55 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I actually already filed the respe

Re: Escaping macros in %changelog

Hello, On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Panu Matilainen <pmati...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> On 02/09/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >>> On

Re: --module-name or some other name?

Hello, On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Chenxiong Qi wrote: > Hi all, > > Recently, a fedpkg global option --module-name could confuse some > packagers easily because word "module" is sort of ambiguous with the > module introduced by Fedora Modularity. This option is used for >

Review Swap

Hello, I would like to do rename of rpkg-client ( https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpkg-client) to rpkg-util and also I would like to go the package again through a review process because the spec might deserve some care: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563184 Can I possibly swap

Re: Anyone interested in Testing the wireframes of the Fedora Community App?

I can test too. On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:19 AM, mohammad luqman wrote: > send me the wireframes too. > > On 16 April 2018 at 11:59, Clement Verna wrote: > >> On 14 April 2018 at 00:08, Abhishek Sharma >> wrote: >> >

Re: Avoiding Jargon: dist-git

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:03 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 6:57 PM, Ben Rosser wrote: > > > > Looking at the dist-git README further reinforces this impression. The > > first sentence says: "DistGit (Distributed Git) is Git with

Re: Avoiding Jargon: dist-git

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:03 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 6:57 PM, Ben Rosser wrote: > > > > Looking at the dist-git README further reinforces this impression. The > > first sentence says: "DistGit (Distributed Git) is Git with

Re: Avoiding Jargon: dist-git

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 4:43 AM Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:03 AM, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sat

Re: Using the Fedora infra for crypto-mining

Hello Dridi, On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > Hello list, > > Since I work on a project that uses the Coverity Scan free plan for > open source software it came to my attention today that free scans > were put on hold and resumed recently

Re: Goodbye nvr.rsplit('-', 2), hello modularity

The question here is why don't we actually implement the modularity the simple way. Let's suppose I would like to make nodejs-8 available in EPEL7. The most effortless way would be to create subdirectory called 8 at src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs with the updated spec file and sources for the

Re: COPR src.fp.o auto-rebuilds

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 20.3.2018 14:33, Michal Novotny wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 27.2.2018 00:04,

Re: COPR src.fp.o auto-rebuilds

> Red Hat > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> you can now very easily setup auto-rebuilds for your src.fp.o package: >> >> 1) make a SCM package in COPR with Clone URL pointing to the src.f

Re: Goodbye nvr.rsplit('-', 2), hello modularity

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Jan Kaluza <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> The question here is why don't we actually implement the modularity >> the simple way. >> >>

Re: Goodbye nvr.rsplit('-', 2), hello modularity

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Jan Kaluza <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> The que

COPR src.fp.o auto-rebuilds

Hello, you can now very easily setup auto-rebuilds for your src.fp.o package: 1) make a SCM package in COPR with Clone URL pointing to the src.fp.o fork (please, use the https:// cloning option) 2) make sure "Webhook Rebuild" checkbox is checked when you are creating the package 3) Go to

f28-ppc64le chroots finally working in COPR

Hello, the fedora-28-ppc64le chroot was no working up until now due to lack of compose. This was resolved however in issue. https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7357 clime ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: how to detect Atomic Rawhide?

code name like e.g. "Beefy Miracle" was for Fedora 17. We are overusing codename VERSION substring for things that are not codenames but they are variants and a version. clime (Michal Novotny) M. > > Pavel > > > ___ > devel ma

Re: Modularity implementation with rpm DistTag

Hello Petr, > So, first, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to think > about this. It's certainly interesting and tries to solve similar > problems from a completely different angle. > > Your proposal focuses on distribution packages rather than on > independent applications. I'd argue

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:43 PM Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > * Matthew Miller: > > > > > > Make it cheap to maintain branches. I expect that one what to achieve > > this would be to build directly out of Git, with synthesized release > > numbers and changelogs. This way, you can apply a lot of

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:57 PM Michal Novotny wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:43 PM Tomas Tomecek > wrote: > >> > * Matthew Miller: >> > >> > >> > Make it cheap to maintain branches. I expect that one what to achieve >> > this w

Modularity implementation with rpm DistTag

Hello Fedora devels! TL;DR: let's use rpm DistTag (DistTag, not the %dist macro) to denote stream names As we all know, modularity was created to provide parallel-availability, that is providing the same package in its different major versions from the same rpm repository. The first question to

Re: libravatar is in fedorainfracloud!

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 2:46 PM Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 21/02/2019 13:41, Michal Novotny wrote: > > > I am not sure why http://libravatar.org to https://www.libravatar.org > > redirect is bad. Can you, please, explain? > > The reason for saying it should redirect with

Re: libravatar is in fedorainfracloud!

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:51 PM Till Maas wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 09:40:16AM +0100, Michal Novotny wrote: > > > We, as a libravatar group, are very happy that Fedora Infra provided > > us with the needed > > hardware. We will keep the service running

  1   2   >