Fedora-Cloud-36-20220703.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-36-20220702.0): ID: 1314196 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314196 ID: 1314209 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314209 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
Hello, I know a lot of you are working on Fedora during the week days, but for some of us, the weekend is the only time we can spend time on it. The problem is, SCM requests are rarely processed during that time, most of them get stuck from Friday afternoon to Monday afternoon (CEST), so it really hampers my work. Would it be possible for a volunteer to agree to do it on the weekend. Best regards, Robert-André ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
Maybe there are contributors where the working week is Sunday-Thursday? On 7/3/22 10:58, Robert-André Mauchin wrote: Hello, I know a lot of you are working on Fedora during the week days, but for some of us, the weekend is the only time we can spend time on it. The problem is, SCM requests are rarely processed during that time, most of them get stuck from Friday afternoon to Monday afternoon (CEST), so it really hampers my work. Would it be possible for a volunteer to agree to do it on the weekend. Best regards, Robert-André ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-35-20220703.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220702.0): ID: 1314212 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314212 ID: 1314225 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314225 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220702.0): ID: 1314214 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_package_install_remove URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314214 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
Am 03.07.22 um 10:46 schrieb Benson Muite: Maybe there are contributors where the working week is Sunday-Thursday? I feel, Fedora's leadership has forgotten, that Fedora is a international community project with people being located around the globe, which means there are quite a few people, who work on Fedora in their spare time, i.e. on "week ends" and on "US holidays". Ralf ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.
Am 03.07.22 um 04:02 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 8:52 PM Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: The e-mail address reaches nowhere or actually, does it still work? Have you tried it? I assume that the fact that the Bugzilla account was disabled means he has left Red Hat and hence the @redhat.com e-mail address has also become invalid, but I might be mistaken. That is what that means. So, someone could cross check with the account db before setting the assignee and skip disabled accounts? If none is available, set QA as assignee, because it is part of QA to see, that bugreports are handled (not by the qa itself ofcourse). Back to the actual problem: can someone grab that bug and handle it pls? best regrads, Marius Schwarz ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
On Sun, Jul 3, 2022 at 11:36 AM Ralf Corsépius wrote: > > Am 03.07.22 um 10:46 schrieb Benson Muite: > > Maybe there are contributors where the working week is Sunday-Thursday? > > I feel, Fedora's leadership has forgotten, that Fedora is a > international community project with people being located around the > globe, which means there are quite a few people, who work on Fedora in > their spare time, i.e. on "week ends" and on "US holidays". There's an ongoing effort to automate this process (mostly validation of the request ticket and the review request bugzilla), so only "exceptions" need to be processed by an actual person. This should reduce the average waiting time for a new dist-git repo by a lot, and it also doesn't depend on anybody sitting at their desk. Fabio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: [HEADS UP] Sphinx 5 and docutils 0.18.1 coming to Rawhide on July 11th
On 6/30/22 5:34 PM, Karolina Surma wrote: eclipseo python-graphviz python-h2 python-priority python-h2 and python-priority are fixed in Rawhide. A fix was pushed for python-graphviz, it just needs Sphinx 5 in Rawhide to build. Best regards, Robert-André ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Do we need a change proposal for this?
On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 1:57 PM Ben Beasley wrote:
>
> Since [1] was approved, I think you would not need a Change proposal as long
> as dropping i686 truly would not impact other packages.
>
> If anything depends on any of the packages you want to change, then you would
> need to figure out the full dependency tree and work in from the leaves,
> convincing those maintainers to drop i686 before doing so yourself.
>
> If there are dependent packages and it isn’t possible to get them to drop
> i686 first, that’s when you would need a Change proposal; [2] is an example
> of that.
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval
> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_i686_JDKs
Yup, for removing unused packages on i686, you're already set.
You might even say I've done your paperwork for you :)
The only two cases you'd need to take care to look into are:
- Go binaries that are used by non-Go packages.
Those (and all their dependencies) would need to stay, unless those
non-Go packages would also stop building on i686.
This includes both build-time and run-time dependencies.
Or, if the package in question is noarch, you'd need to make sure that
it's not ever built on a i686 build host, and doesn't use the
functionality provided by the Go binary at runtime.
- Go libraries used for building several language bindings for some
other project (I'm thinking of stuff like protobuf):
The Go bindings for provides-multiple-language-bindings packages would
need to be gated behind "%ifnarch %{ix86}".
So, It won't be as simple as just dropping "%{ix86}" from %go_arches,
I'm afraid :(
Fabio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 proposal: Linux Firmware Minimization (late System-Wide Change proposal)
On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 8:36 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 02/07/2022 18:27, Ben Cotton wrote: > > This proposal has been withdrawn by the owners. > > Why? Very useful feature. Because they didn't coordinate with the maintainers, it wasn't ready and overall has flaws that need to be addressed. Something to a similar effect will be coordinated and submitted when it's actually viable. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 proposal: GNU Toolchain Update (glibc 2.36, binutils 2.38) (late System-Wide Change proposal)
On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 8:56 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNUToolchainF37 > > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive > community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved > by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee. > > > == Summary == > Update the Fedora 37 GNU Toolchain to glibc 2.36, binutils 2.38. Is there a way we could get back to shipping up-to-date binutils? I mean, 2.39 should be released on July 8th and the potential release date is August 6th. Also in the 1st half of the year we used to get new GCC, binutils, and glibc. Now somehow in the last releases binutils is one version older. Is there a reason this change happened? Is it schedule related? It does seem that binutils 2.39 should be able to fit. It's tight, but possible. Cheers, david > > The set of core GNU Toolchain packages for Fedora 37 are as follows: > > * GNU C Compiler 12 (first released in Fedora 36) > ** Associated runtimes for C++ (libstdc++), Go (gccgo), OpenMP (gomp), > Fortran (gfortran), D (phobos), Objective C/C++. > * GNU Binary Utilities 2.38 (expected release in Fedora 37) > * GNU C Library 2.36 (expected release in Fedora 37) > * GNU Debugger 12 (immediately available in Fedora 35, 36, and 37) > > The glibc 2.36 change will be tracked in this top-level GNU Toolchain > system-wide update. > > The binutils 2.38 change will be tracked in this top-level GNU > Toolchain system-wide update. > > == Owner == > * Name: [[User:codonell|Carlos O'Donell]] > * Email: car...@redhat.com > > > > == Detailed Description == > The GNU Compiler Collection, GNU C Library, GNU Debugger, and GNU > Binary Utilities make up the core part of the GNU Toolchain and it is > useful for our users to transition these components as a complete > implementation when making a new release of Fedora. > > The GNU C Library version 2.36 is expected to be released in the > beginning of August 2022; we have started closely tracking the glibc > 2.36 development code in Fedora Rawhide and are addressing any issues > as they arise. Given the present schedule Fedora 37 will branch after > the release of glibc 2.36. However, the mass rebuild schedule means > Fedora 37 will mass rebuild (if required) before the final release of > glibc 2.36, but after the ABI is frozen. > > The GNU Binutils version 2.38 was released in February 2022; and we > have already been using this version of binutils in Fedora Rawhide > successfully to build the distribution. Given the present schedule for > Fedora 37 we will continue to use Binutils 2.38 for Fedora 37. > > > == Benefit to Fedora == > Stays up to date with latest features, improvements, security and bug > fixes from gcc, glibc, binutils, and gdb upstream. > > The goal is to track and transition to the latest components of the > GNU Toolchain. > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: Fedora Toolchain Team (gcc, glibc, binutils, gdb, > ...) developers need to ensure that gcc, glibc, binutils, and gdb in > rawhide are stable and ready for the Fedora 37 branch. > > * Other developers: Given that glibc is backwards compatible and we > have been testing the new glibc in rawhide it should make very little > impact when updated, except for the occasional deprecation warnings > and removal of legacy interfaces from public header files. > > * Release engineering: A mass rebuild is strongly encouraged; > [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10865 #10865] > > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change) > * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) > * Alignment with Objectives: N/A > > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > Any source level changes required for glibc 2.36 will be noted here: > https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.36#Packaging_Changes > > == How To Test == > The GNU Compiler Collection has its own testsuite which is run during > the package build and examined by the gcc developers before being > uploaded. > > The GNU C Library has its own testsuite which is run during the > package build and examined by the glibc developers before being > uploaded. This test suite has over 6200 tests that run to verify the > correct operation of the library. In the future we may also run the > microbenchmark to look for performance regressions. > > The GNU Binutils has its own testsuite which is run during the package > build and examined by binutils developers before being uploaded. The > regression testsuite is run to verify the correct operation of the > static linker and attendant utilities. > > The GNU Debugger has its own testsuite which is run during the package > build and examined by gdb developers before being uploaded. The > regression testsuite is run to verify the correct operation of the > debugger. > > > == User Experience == > > > == Dependencies == > All packages do not need to be rebuilt due to backwards compatibility. > However, it is advantageous
Re: Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 at 05:37, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > Am 03.07.22 um 10:46 schrieb Benson Muite: > > Maybe there are contributors where the working week is Sunday-Thursday? > > I feel, Fedora's leadership has forgotten, that Fedora is a > international community project with people being located around the > globe, which means there are quite a few people, who work on Fedora in > their spare time, i.e. on "week ends" and on "US holidays". > > Can you help a little here and describe what you believe a realistic way of solving this problem is? Currently the volunteers are only available on Monday to Friday, the employees are also on those dates, and attempts to have other people do that work end up with a lot of complaints that SCM commits were done wrong leading to the volunteers leaving. A guide to what is wanted may allow people to figure out ways to reach it somehow. > Ralf > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > -- Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Rawhide-20220703.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 11 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 64/236 (x86_64), 22/165 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220702.n.0): ID: 1314257 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314257 ID: 1314261 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314261 ID: 1314314 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso anaconda_help URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314314 ID: 1314335 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_printing_builtin URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314335 ID: 1314431 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz clocks@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314431 ID: 1314440 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314440 ID: 1314442 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314442 ID: 1314443 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314443 ID: 1314445 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314445 ID: 1314446 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz help_viewer@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314446 ID: 1314447 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314447 ID: 1314469 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314469 ID: 1314559 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_btrfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314559 ID: 1314585 Test: aarch64 universal install_blivet_software_raid@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314585 ID: 1314589 Test: aarch64 universal install_kickstart_hdd@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314589 ID: 1314608 Test: aarch64 universal install_blivet_lvmthin@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314608 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220702.n.0): ID: 1314283 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314283 ID: 1314290 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314290 ID: 1314294 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314294 ID: 1314302 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314302 ID: 1314305 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314305 ID: 1314312 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314312 ID: 1314319 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314319 ID: 1314334 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314334 ID: 1314339 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso clocks URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314339 ID: 1314344 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314344 ID: 1314348 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314348 ID: 1314352 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314352 ID: 1314353 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_package_install_remove@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314353 ID: 1314355 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314355 ID: 1314357 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_reboot_unmount@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314357 ID: 1314358 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_system_logging@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314358 ID: 1314359 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314359 ID: 1314360 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_service_manipulation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314360 ID: 1314361 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314361 ID: 1314362 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_update_cli@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314362 ID: 1314388 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_btrfs_preserve_home@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1314388 ID: 1314389 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_btrfs_pres
Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.
On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 05:31:13PM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote: > On Saturday, July 2, 2022 3:11:44 PM CDT Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 11:54:17AM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote: > > > On Saturday, July 2, 2022 10:01:18 AM CDT Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > > This is an extremely common problem in Fedora: the de facto maintainer > > > > is not the main admin, and so the bugs are assigned to the wrong > > > > person. Ideally we would automatically orphan a package if the main > > > > admin does not have any commits to the package for a certain period of > > > > time, e.g. three years. > > > > > > It would help if other people besides the main admin could change the > > > Bugzilla assignee. After all, if the main admin is non-responsive, it's > > > going to be difficult to get them to do it. > > > > I'm not sure the main admin matters as much as this thread indicates? > > All the other maintainers of the package are CC'ed, in this case > > belegdol. > > Maybe the main admin isn't so important, but the Bugzilla assignee is. > Packages should be assigned to the person who is actually maintaining it. > This Well, what if it's 2 people and they trade off? Or 3 ? or 4? Or some people handle bugs in one area and others in another... having only one 'assignee' is kind of limiting. ;( > makes it so bugs are more likely to be addressed. Then, the bugs will also I'm not sure that it makes bugs more likely to be addressed. The only difference between assignee and someone on cc is what field bugzilla shows. They both get email, no? > show up in the "Open bugs assigned to me" link on the Bugzilla homepage[1] > for > the actual maintainer. This is more important for EPEL than Fedora proper. > For > packagers who don't care about EPEL, EPEL bugs should be assigned to the co- > maintainer (or the epel-packagers-sig) who actually maintains the EPEL > branches; the latter should be held responsible to fix bugs and be the one > who > is NEEDINFO'd (when/if that happens), not the Fedora maintainer. It seems > like > there is at least some agreement in this area[2]. Ah, I never use that anymore. I tend to use command line 'bugzilla query' or https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/ along with emails. But perhaps you're right as I have a lot of bugs and could probibly do better prioritizing. I personally don't like NEEDINFO. We don't have any common perception of when it should be used and it can be used by anyone. :( I only use needinfo on things that are time sensitive and some specific information is required from the needinfo target. Like "can you fix this in time to do a new compose before go/no-go". Others use it for an implied 'do you plan to fix this bug', others 'it's been a while and you didn't get to this bug so are you going to?'. Some people even set it right away when the bug was filed, not leaving any time for 'normal' processing. When/if we move off bugzilla we should take all these considerations into what we end up choosing and ways to make these workflows better. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Bugzilla: You can't ask Lennart Poettering because that account is disabled.
On Sun, Jul 03, 2022 at 11:52:26AM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote: > Am 03.07.22 um 04:02 schrieb Neal Gompa: > > On Sat, Jul 2, 2022 at 8:52 PM Kevin Kofler via devel > > wrote: > > > Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > > The e-mail address reaches nowhere > > > or actually, does it still work? Have you tried it? I assume that the fact > > > that the Bugzilla account was disabled means he has left Red Hat and hence > > > the @redhat.com e-mail address has also become invalid, but I might be > > > mistaken. > > > > > That is what that means. > > So, someone could cross check with the account db before setting the > assignee and skip disabled accounts? I'm not sure there's a easy way to get this info, but sure. Filed https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/toddlers/issue/106 on it. > If none is available, set QA as > assignee, because it is part of QA to see, that bugreports are handled (not > by the qa itself ofcourse). There isn't a 'qa' asignee, nor do they have cycles to handle every bug report (there's a lot more package maintainers than qa group folks). > Back to the actual problem: can someone grab that bug and handle it pls? Possibly belegdol can, I don't know if he's active or interested in that package anymore. Failing that, file upstream? kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2022-07-04 Fedora QA Meeting
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting tomorrow. I don't have anything much for the agenda again. Also it'll be a holiday in the US so we'd likely be missing a lot of folks. If you're aware of anything it would be useful to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail and we can run the meeting. Thanks folks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora SCM requests on the weekend
On Sun, Jul 03, 2022 at 12:11:40PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Sun, Jul 3, 2022 at 11:36 AM Ralf Corsépius wrote: > > > > Am 03.07.22 um 10:46 schrieb Benson Muite: > > > Maybe there are contributors where the working week is Sunday-Thursday? > > > > I feel, Fedora's leadership has forgotten, that Fedora is a > > international community project with people being located around the > > globe, which means there are quite a few people, who work on Fedora in > > their spare time, i.e. on "week ends" and on "US holidays". > > There's an ongoing effort to automate this process (mostly validation > of the request ticket and the review request bugzilla), so only > "exceptions" need to be processed by an actual person. This should > reduce the average waiting time for a new dist-git repo by a lot, and > it also doesn't depend on anybody sitting at their desk. yeah, I am hoping once we get it automated we can have it trigger on message bus messages, so maintainers would only have to wait a few minutes after request (in the case that all checks pass/no exceptions). That said, until then I can try and run things on weekends. No promises, but I will try and do so. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Anyone want to review swap? (rocm-opencl)
On 2022-06-28 3:56 p.m., "Jeremy Newton" wrote: I'm looking to see if anyone wants to review swap with me: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2090823 Thanks! I will take it as needed for AMD system. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
so.version bump for embree 3.13.3
Hello team, Due to so.version bump, embree 3.13.3 got side-tagged for build. Affected packages are blender, luxcorerender, usd and godot. Currently, blender failed due python issue but other packages should be fine. Use "fedpkg build --target=f37-build-side-54766" for building. Luya ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
