Re: [packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On 6/20/16, Olaf Hering wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, Dave Plater wrote: > >> So we can safely delete the other gstreamer packages or are there >> packages that will get broken as a result? > > A few packages which are linked in but have no BUILD_ORIG or other knobs > can be excluded

Re: [packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On Mon, Jun 20, Dave Plater wrote: > So we can safely delete the other gstreamer packages or are there > packages that will get broken as a result? A few packages which are linked in but have no BUILD_ORIG or other knobs can be excluded from openSUSE_Tumbleweed. Looks like all _linked gstreamer

Re: [packman] Stable Packman for Leap

On Mon, Jun 20, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Ok guys this is again half-assed solution with package suffixes and others. This is for the current way of publishing packages. > We need to do this properly. I'm actually ok with reorganizing the whole project layout. Since the resulting layout is not

Re: [packman] Stable Packman for Leap

Ok guys this is again half-assed solution with package suffixes and others. We need to do this properly. 1) Have packman-essentials-Factory project * builds against factory only * links only factory packages * links only factory deps 2) Have packman-essentials-Product project * Builds only

Re: [packman] Stable Packman for Leap

On 6/20/16, Frederic Crozat wrote: > Le lun. 20 juin 2016 à 10:07, Dave Plater a écrit : > >> This thread has the wrong subject. >> > > Not anymore ;) > > I think this is a proposal for a new Packman model. >> Rolling release Packman and stable Packman,

Re: [packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On 20 June 2016 at 12:02, Olaf Hering wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, Richard Brown wrote: > >> Packman's current model for Tumbleweed, building against >> multimedia:libs and not Tumbleweed, means that Packman users get >> packages of the NEXT version of ffmpeg, gstreamer, etc, BEFORE

Re: [packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On 6/20/16, Olaf Hering wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, Richard Brown wrote: > >> Packman's current model for Tumbleweed, building against >> multimedia:libs and not Tumbleweed, means that Packman users get >> packages of the NEXT version of ffmpeg, gstreamer, etc, BEFORE it is >> ready

Re: [packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On Mon, Jun 20, Richard Brown wrote: > Packman's current model for Tumbleweed, building against > multimedia:libs and not Tumbleweed, means that Packman users get > packages of the NEXT version of ffmpeg, gstreamer, etc, BEFORE it is > ready for Tumbleweed Regarding gstreamer, I wonder what kind

Re: [packman] Stable Packman for Leap

On Mon, Jun 20, Frederic Crozat wrote: > Le lun. 20 juin 2016 à 10:07, Dave Plater a écrit : > I think this is a proposal for a new Packman model. > > Rolling release Packman and stable Packman, because ATM it is > > impossible to have both but maybe Richard can help to

[packman] Packman for Tumbleweed

On 20 June 2016 at 10:03, Dave Plater wrote: > This thread has the wrong subject. > I think this is a proposal for a new Packman model. > Rolling release Packman and stable Packman, While I support this idea, I still think packman needs to stop rolling faster than

[packman] Stable Packman for Leap

Le lun. 20 juin 2016 à 10:07, Dave Plater a écrit : > This thread has the wrong subject. > Not anymore ;) I think this is a proposal for a new Packman model. > Rolling release Packman and stable Packman, because ATM it is > impossible to have both but maybe Richard can

Re: [packman] [PM] mythtv-0_27 0.27.3-5.2 (openSUSE 13.2/x86_64)

The package is ready but there is a bug: https://code.mythtv.org/trac/ticket/12735#no2 20.06.2016, 09:37, "process" : > Dear packman team, > > you are doing a great job on your services, thank you. > > In April, the mythtv team finally released their new version of mythtv, >

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

This thread has the wrong subject. I think this is a proposal for a new Packman model. Rolling release Packman and stable Packman, because ATM it is impossible to have both but maybe Richard can help to get this done. Meanwhile we do the best we can to make Packman as stable as possible. Regards

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

Le lun. 20 juin 2016 à 09:45, Olaf Hering a écrit : > On Mon, Jun 20, Frederic Crozat wrote: > > > You seem to forget the entire mess it created for Packman users when > ffmpeg > > 3 became the "default" ffmpeg in Packman. > > What mess was that? Likely just the build breakage

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

On Mon, Jun 20, Frederic Crozat wrote: > You seem to forget the entire mess it created for Packman users when ffmpeg > 3 became the "default" ffmpeg in Packman. What mess was that? Likely just the build breakage caused by the API change. I think we should try to _link

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

Le lun. 20 juin 2016 à 08:29, Dave Plater a écrit : > On 6/19/16, Richard Brown wrote: > > On 19 June 2016 at 16:41, Dave Plater wrote: > >>> The pkg in multimedia:libs is about one hundred, thousand, million > >>> times

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

Mandag den 20. juni 2016 06:22:35 skrev Olaf Hering: > There is always a tradeoff between "wanting the latest" and "just wand > the codecs". The latter could be tested for 42.2 by creating a few > 42.2_ (gstreamer*, ffmpeg) which link to OBS:42.2:Update. Olaf, to be honest I think most people

[packman] [PM] mythtv-0_27 0.27.3-5.2 (openSUSE 13.2/x86_64)

Dear packman team, you are doing a great job on your services, thank you. In April, the mythtv team finally released their new version of mythtv, starting to deal with the web interface aside other things. I am just curious, if someone of your team is working on building the new packages or I

Re: [packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

On 6/19/16, Richard Brown wrote: > On 19 June 2016 at 16:41, Dave Plater wrote: >>> The pkg in multimedia:libs is about one hundred, thousand, million >>> times more at risk of being broken than the pkg in Factory >> >> Not if it's well maintained >