On Saturday 06 March 2010 19:38:16 Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar naheemzaf...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com
Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
(I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
On 03/08/2010 11:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Major KDE update was in time of Fedora 9, so it's not an issue today.
And this it the first problem - we should not call major, minor, bugfix
release
because it doesn't mean the same for every each app out in the wild!!!
Yes, it can get
Am Montag, den 08.03.2010, 12:27 +0200 schrieb Juha Tuomala:
Again, you can't cut regressions from features :(
To name few, your last push comes with:
- kmail that can't anymore 'Add address to book'.
- kaddressbook doesn't have 'Merge' feature anymore.
- kaddressbook View, Edit, Tools
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 12:27:07PM +0200, Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Yes, it can get confusing. I think it was Kevin Kofler who suggested to
talk about feature releases vs. bugfix releases instead
to avoid confusion.
Again you can't cut bugfixes
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:47 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
This is not the purpose of updates-testing, it is not an alternative
update repo. It is there for
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 22:17 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
And as you obviously didn't finish reading my sentence, that is not
the only solution I proposed. Read again, there is a 0 additional repo
proposal too.
Having multiple package versions in a single repository is essentially
like having
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
confirm this. I thought that releng was asking for the overrides to be
removed when the package was pushed to stable but I could be wrong.
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:24:24PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
confirm this. I thought that releng was asking for the overrides to be
removed when the package was
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 16:32 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:24:24PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
confirm this. I thought that releng was
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 02:05:05PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 16:32 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
That's the page for releng's actions in response to a buildroot override
request. I'm looking for where it's documented when to ask for a buildroot
override, when to
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:47 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
This is not the purpose of
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
If you have a large codebase two months is barely
I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
conservative updates style replies... for the record:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
I'd personally want to be able to _choose_ if and when I
Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
the time to make a system update to F12.
All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used to built the entire
Fedora tree. Suddenly bumping a GCC version
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 17:25:18 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
+1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
versions to F11.
+1
Why? I don't want to
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org:
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org:
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to
From what I see, to educate our users to actually test and provide
feedback is more laborious than educating our package maintainers. For
maintainers, discussions such as those that have occurred serve to
clarify, but I think in the case of users, it wouldn't be very painful
to insert one more
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org:
Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
I had two ways:
1 update many packages in old distro
2 use previous
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen thom...@fedoraproject.org:
Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
I had two ways:
1
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Debarshi Ray:
Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
the time to make a system update to F12.
All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:32:42PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
I don't really care for desktop programs here. If you want to upgrade
X.org or OpenOffice - I probably don't notice it. But if you plan to
upgrade things like python, php - it can be a problem for me.
On the python side, we
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On
2010/3/7 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
One alternative that I have heard of that you might want to look into is
RHEL5 plus packages from iuscommunity.org. As I understand it, they are
trying to produce packages that you can install in parallel to the existing
versions of certain
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:03:57PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
My reason to comment on those threads on devel list is really just that I
want to retain the freedom to decide when my updates are ready to be
released. I'm responsible for giving them adequate testing. Users
expect the packager
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 11:02:46AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
On 03/07/2010 02:42 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
   * New version introduced in F11.
  Â
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 11:02:46 -0500, Orcan wrote:
You can ask for
removal from the buildroot override as soon as you are done building
your package. In fact, Releng explicitly asks us to tell them when we
are done so they can remove the override.
That's inconvenient and limiting. You can only
Hi,
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
* Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
* Useless
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
Hi,
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@foomail.com:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
*
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Regards
Till
pgpdxHb1B1LoX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On 03/06/2010 11:28 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Even if it did not it would be useful to
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com:
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
Hi,
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@foomail.com:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar naheemzaf...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com
Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
(I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
desktop)
I think for many people the issue is not that it can be
On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
[...]
Because I don't understand the
criteria for Fedora package update.
Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
Because the KDE
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:30 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
I have seen some discussions, but I don't follow them. I'm waiting for
results ;)
Get involved, try to influence the discussion.
Pity. There are many Fedora policies that are useless for end users
like me, but update policy
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 21:10 +0100 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann'
Mierzejewski:
On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
[...]
Because I don't understand the
criteria for Fedora package update.
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar naheemzaf...@gmail.com:
[snipped]
PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
there are many users who dislike Ubuntu because bugs are not fixed and they
have to live
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
+1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
versions to F11.
Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
And I
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:16:45PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar naheemzaf...@gmail.com:
[snipped]
PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
there are many users
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
+1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
versions to F11.
Why? I don't want to update
On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
+1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
versions to F11.
Why? I don't want to
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
+1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:48:23AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
deal with the problems that might arise with the new version. But if the
new version is dumped upon me in the middle of a week, I'm left without
a choice. I have to immediately deal with whatever problems arise from
the upgrade.
On 03/07/2010 04:14 AM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
I'm just a guest here :)
I'm not a Fedora developer so my vote doesn't really matter.
Getting involved does not require a vote and any user position if
expressed in a constructive fashion does matter and is part of how we
can form a decision
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
I understand that. However there are
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
full system update?
Time. A simple yum update or make a selective update takes a few
minutes. A whole system update takes more.
I've
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but generally it's bound to fail.
A security update in an application
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
full system update?
Time. A simple yum update or make a selective update takes a
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:28:32AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but
Em Sáb, 2010-03-06 às 18:00 +0100, Christoph Wickert escreveu:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
* Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
* Useless
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Moreover you also have the option of updating security fixes only.
That option doesn't really exist, as was already demonstrated:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/131926.html
Björn Persson
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
in past 11 years, and this is something new
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but generally
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com:
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
Since you don't want to update every 6 months, you want people to keep
updating every now and then?
Cheers,
Debarshi
--
One reason that life is complex is that it has a real part and an
imaginary part.
-- Andrew Koenig
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
big
2010/3/7 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com:
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
If you have a large codebase two months
On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
* Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
If you have a large codebase
Again I say updates-testing! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
big evaluating a move
Then make it 3 months, 4 months...
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
updates-testing should not be used for this purpose
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 01:49 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
Let's consider a situation - I'm developing a project in php 5.2. This
project might work fine on php 5.3 - I don't know I didn't tested it
yet. I'm depending on 5.2 version. Testing this code for a new php
will take some time.
On Sat 6 March 2010 5:54:11 pm Conrad Meyer wrote:
All Fedora developers are people, too -- please remember to show
some respect.
Be excellent to eachother
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Our_Community
--
Ryan Rix
== http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://rix.si/ ==
71 matches
Mail list logo
