2010/5/4 Kevin Kofler :
> Seth Vidal wrote:
>> * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
>> aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
>> they become serious enough to warrant an official warning. When this is
>> done the subject line of the me
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Run "strace id" and see if it is able to open and read
>> /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/passwd. If so, it would be a glibc bug. If
>> not, investigate why those files cannot be read.
>
> You mention LDAP auth. Do you have users on the system handled b
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 4 May 2010, John Reiser wrote:
>
>>> Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
>>
>> Text search is powerful, but a sorted list is even better.
>>
>
> The script I wrote to make this list is here:
>
>
> I should have
On Tue, 4 May 2010, John Reiser wrote:
>> Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
>
> Text search is powerful, but a sorted list is even better.
>
The script I wrote to make this list is here:
I should have sorted the pkgs at the end, sorry.
thanks,
-sv
--
deve
On Tue, 04 May 2010 21:08:23 -0400
Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:44 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > Too costly with the current tools, I have no doubt. The method you
> > describe doesn't look manageable, you're right.
> >
> > Perhaps I should go research packaging systems and
Start End Name
Tue 13-Apr Tue 04-May Beta Testing
Thu 29-Apr Wed 05-May Test 'Final' Test Compose
Tue 04-May Tue 04-May End of Beta Testing
Tue 04-May Tue 04-May Development: Final Freeze
Wed 05-May Wed 05-May Final Blocker Meeting (f13blocker) #4
Thu 06-May Thu 06-May Com
> Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
Text search is powerful, but a sorted list is even better.
greater for f12: anjuta
f12 = 1:anjuta-2.28.2.0-1.fc12.src
f13 = 1:anjuta-2.28.1.0-2.fc13.src
greater for f12: archmage
f12 = archmage-0.2.4-2.fc12.src
f13 = archm
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:44 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> Too costly with the current tools, I have no doubt. The method you
> describe doesn't look manageable, you're right.
>
> Perhaps I should go research packaging systems and strategies, there
> may be demand for more customizable systems. This
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 00:16 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Nor can you really stop us from closing all bugs filed
> against the conservative official repo as WONTFIX with a comment of "fixed
> in kde-redhat stable, please use that".
If that practice became a problem, it would be escalated through
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 08:17:13PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 19:49 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:21:54PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
> > > I'll work with FES to to go
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:35 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> It probably means that there was a race condition and a second (older)
> update got pushed.
>
> Yep. the 2.6-6 went to dist-f13 March 2, the 2.6-5 build went in March
> 4th.
There was no race condition in the pushing. The older update wa
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 22:22 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:21 PM, James Laska wrote:
> > Greetings folks,
> >
> > According to the schedule [1], Fedora 13 is scheduled to enter the
> > release candidate phase this Thursday, May 4, 2010. In order to enter
> > this phase, a
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 19:49 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:21:54PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
> > I'll work with FES to to go through and get some builds out. Some might
> > make it in to F13 final
There was an outage starting at 2010-05-04 22:13 UTC, which lasted
approximately 1 hour.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2010-05-04 22:13 UTC'
Reason for outage:
While trying to recover from this last major
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 19:49 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:21:54PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
> > I'll work with FES to to go through and get some builds out. Some might
> > make it in to F13 final
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:21:54PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
> I'll work with FES to to go through and get some builds out. Some might
> make it in to F13 final, some will go out as F13-updates.
>
> greater for f12: fusecompr
Am Mittwoch, den 05.05.2010, 00:46 +0200 schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 00:36, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> Hmm, this is what I did this a couple times, i.e. I forward the
> >> backtrace to upstream without including any other information, since
> >> the user
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 00:36, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Hmm, this is what I did this a couple times, i.e. I forward the
>> backtrace to upstream without including any other information, since
>> the user does not provide any.
>>
>> What I receive from upstream is that they need
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Hmm, this is what I did this a couple times, i.e. I forward the
> backtrace to upstream without including any other information, since
> the user does not provide any.
>
> What I receive from upstream is that they need more info. Then I go
> back to the user asking once more
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Mat Booth wrote:
> On 4 May 2010 21:29, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>>
>>> Please, dear maintainers, take care of your ABRT reports and forward
>>> them if you cannot handle them yourselves!
>>>
>>
>> I want to d
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:44 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> How about a de-centralized approach: main repo gets only critical
>> fixes. Releng will be responsible only for this repo.
>> Other than this, every major SIG gets their own update repo. They can
>> choose to (but ar
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:44 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:20 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> >> On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:18 +0200
> >> Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>
> >> > Bernd Stramm wrote:
> >> > > I would like to pick th
On 4 May 2010 21:29, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>
>> Please, dear maintainers, take care of your ABRT reports and forward
>> them if you cannot handle them yourselves!
>>
>
> I want to do this, but I need to verify first if the bug is packagin
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Camilo Mesias wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
> redundancy of it.
>
> No
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 17:44 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
>
> I was thinking about filtering the updates suggested by the current
> system. That is more or less what someone has to do manually today if
> they want to experiment with advanced versions of a particular
> package.
That assumes that the
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Camilo Mesias wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
redundancy of it.
No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>
> I'm disappoin
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:20 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:18 +0200
>> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>> > Bernd Stramm wrote:
>> > > I would like to pick the packages that I'm adventurous with.
>> > > Currently that's not very
On Tue, 04 May 2010 14:26:34 -0700
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:20 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:18 +0200
> > Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > > Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > > > I would like to pick the packages that I'm adventurous with.
> > > > Currently th
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 15:20 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:18 +0200
> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> > Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > > I would like to pick the packages that I'm adventurous with.
> > > Currently that's not very easy, either an adventurousness level is
> > > enabled in
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:21 PM, James Laska wrote:
> Greetings folks,
>
> According to the schedule [1], Fedora 13 is scheduled to enter the
> release candidate phase this Thursday, May 4, 2010. In order to enter
> this phase, all OPEN F13Blocker bugs must be in MODIFIED or ON_QA.
>
> At the time
James Antill wrote:
> I can't think why you'd want a plugin
To automatically count the package as installed as soon as you "yum install"
it?
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Here's a list of f12 -> f13 with unclean update paths based on srpm.
I'll work with FES to to go through and get some builds out. Some might
make it in to F13 final, some will go out as F13-updates.
greater for f12: rawtherapee
f12 = rawtherapee-3.0-0.20.a1.fc12.src
f13 = rawtherapee-3.0-0.18.a
Seth Vidal wrote:
> * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
> aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
> they become serious enough to warrant an official warning. When this is
> done the subject line of the message will be prefixed with
>
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Pod-Tests/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv7523
Modified Files:
perl-Pod-Tests.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Pod-Tests.spec
===
>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>>
>>> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
>>> redundancy of it.
>>>
>>> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
I'm disappointed that the thread is closed when there seems to be an
issue
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 16:21 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> Greetings folks,
>
> According to the schedule [1], Fedora 13 is scheduled to enter the
> release candidate phase this Thursday, May 4, 2010.
Please note, this Thursday is May 6, 2010.
Thanks,
James
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 16:21 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> = kernel =
> * 587171 kernel (a...@redhat.com) NEW - Intel kms leads to an all
> black display
Upon closer reading, I think this fixed by the same patch as fixed
584229; they're still separate bugs, but that just means the log
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Pod-Strip/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv5349
Modified Files:
perl-Pod-Strip.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Pod-Strip.spec
===
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Pod-Spell/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv3806
Modified Files:
perl-Pod-Spell.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Pod-Spell.spec
===
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
> Please, dear maintainers, take care of your ABRT reports and forward
> them if you cannot handle them yourselves!
>
I want to do this, but I need to verify first if the bug is packaging
related or upstream related.
However I get these
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Pod-Readme/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv1071
Modified Files:
perl-Pod-Readme.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Pod-Readme.spec
Greetings folks,
According to the schedule [1], Fedora 13 is scheduled to enter the
release candidate phase this Thursday, May 4, 2010. In order to enter
this phase, all OPEN F13Blocker bugs must be in MODIFIED or ON_QA.
At the time of this mail, there are 10 issues remaining. The list of
NEW +
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>
>> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
>> redundancy of it.
>>
>> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>>
>> Thank You,
>> Seth Vidal
>> Fe
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
> redundancy of it.
>
> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>
> Thank You,
> Seth Vidal
> Fedora Hall Monitor
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ha
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-05-04/fesco.2010-05-04-19.00.html
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2010-05-04)
Meeting started by nirik at 19:00:01 UTC (full logs).
Meeting summary
1. init process (nirik, 19:00:01)
2. #351 Create a policy for updates - status report on imple
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Pod-Abstract/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv26614
Modified Files:
perl-Pod-Abstract.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Pod-Abstract.spec
=
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:25 PM, devzero2000 wrote:
> 2010/5/4 Björn Persson
>
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
>> > Well, i wouldn't call a software that counts serverside downloads of
>> > FOSS software and gives based on that downloads/installations, a
>> > popularity suggestion in packagekit, spyware.
2010/5/4 Björn Persson
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
> > Well, i wouldn't call a software that counts serverside downloads of
> > FOSS software and gives based on that downloads/installations, a
> > popularity suggestion in packagekit, spyware.
> > There's nothing at all that gets sent out of your box.
On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:18 +0200
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > I would like to pick the packages that I'm adventurous with.
> > Currently that's not very easy, either an adventurousness level is
> > enabled in the repos or it isn't. That means my package manager
> > gives me a
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl-Version/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv20711
Modified Files:
perl-Perl-Version.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl-Version.spec
=
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl-Tags/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv19901
Modified Files:
perl-Perl-Tags.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl-Tags.spec
==
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl-PrereqScanner/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18982
Modified Files:
perl-Perl-PrereqScanner.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl-PrereqScanner.spec
===
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> Any one of those can invalidate the mathematical tests you say to run
>> as they require random pools, controls on populations polled, and
>> non-leading questions. People keep telling you this and you seem to
>>
This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
redundancy of it.
No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
Thank You,
Seth Vidal
Fedora Hall Monitor
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Hall_Monitor_Policy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://a
Bernd Stramm wrote:
> I would like to pick the packages that I'm adventurous with. Currently
> that's not very easy, either an adventurousness level is enabled in the
> repos or it isn't. That means my package manager gives me a flood of
> updates that I don't want. It would be nice to be able to
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl-MinimumVersion/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18316
Modified Files:
perl-Perl-MinimumVersion.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl-MinimumVersion.spec
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> That's another problem with the poll. "Adventurous" means different
>> things to different people, so you can't assume that everybody is
>> responding to the same thing.
>
> "Adventurous" has quite an implication of br
On 05/04/2010 02:00 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
Wrong. There was data, on this very list, of users who desired more
conservative updates. There was also evidence on IRC of more users who
felt the same. I'd say there is the same quality of data
It's an interesting commentary on history to note t
Jesse Keating wrote:
> The solution to "shit went out and broke my stuff" isn't to make it
> easier to put shit out, it's to make it harder to put broken shit out
> in the first place.
Sure, that's a nice theory, but in practice, no matter how much testing you
require, there will ALWAYS be regres
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-perlmenu/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17846
Modified Files:
perl-perlmenu.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-perlmenu.spec
=
Jesse Keating wrote:
> If/when karma is required for an update to go out, or a timeout in
> -testing, we will see an uptick in karma.
You keep claiming that. You have no evidence whatsoever for that, and it
doesn't seem plausible to me at all. Users only care about having the issue
fixed for the
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl-Critic/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv11556
Modified Files:
perl-Perl-Critic.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl-Critic.spec
Peter Jones wrote:
> Wait just a second - you're arguing that requiring testing doesn't work
> because nobody tested the KDE spin within 8 days. You might want to
> rethink this position.
Why? I don't see the contradiction. If nobody tests things, testing doesn't
and can't work.
Kevin Ko
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-PerlIO-via-symlink/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17107
Modified Files:
perl-PerlIO-via-symlink.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-PerlIO-via-symlink.spec
===
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Thomas Spura wrote:
> Am Montag, den 03.05.2010, 22:37 -0400 schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
>> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
>> > Once upon a time, Orcan Ogetbil said:
>> >> The statistic talks. It doesn't only talk. It yells. Ignoring this
>> >> test s
On 05/04/2010 02:14 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> This involved doing another build of the package, which could
>> involve changes in the buildroot and anomalies in the build
>> process. Ask DaveJ some time about what happened to his kernel
>> builds when the build host did a cl
On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:04:45 +0200
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Peter Jones wrote:
> > Wait just a second - you're arguing that requiring testing doesn't
> > work because nobody tested the KDE spin within 8 days. You might
> > want to rethink this position.
>
> Why? I don't see the contradiction. If no
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv16129
Modified Files:
perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic.spec
===
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Some risks are so low that they're basically negligible. If the 2 options
> are keeping an existing regression (which missed testing) in updates for a
> few more days or risking the off chance that there MAY be another regression
> with a proba
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-PerlIO-gzip/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv15594
Modified Files:
perl-PerlIO-gzip.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-PerlIO-gzip.spec
On 05/04/2010 01:40 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Peter Jones wrote:
>> I'm sorry you don't like it, but you've had ample occasion to come up with
>> a better idea, and you have roundly refused to make any attempt at doing
>> so.
>
> "I'm sorry you don't like my plate of Merde Provençale, but you've h
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> If the breakage was more of a functional break and not a dep break,
> that's where automated testing comes in, and we grow the automated
> functional testing of updates so that if an update comes along we can
> detect the breakage and alert bo
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-PerlIO-eol/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv13963
Modified Files:
perl-PerlIO-eol.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-PerlIO-eol.spec
===
Jesse Keating wrote:
> This involved doing another build of the package, which could involve
> changes in the buildroot and anomalies in the build process. Ask DaveJ
> some time about what happened to his kernel builds when the build host
> did a clock adjustment during the build. Shit happens, a
On 05/04/2010 06:04 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Peter Jones wrote:
Wait just a second - you're arguing that requiring testing doesn't work
because nobody tested the KDE spin within 8 days. You might want to
rethink this position.
Why? I don't see the contradiction. If nobody tests things,
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> It's common sense that older releases should be receiving more testing,
> but here in reality it is the opposite. If I am wrong, please prove it.
Indeed, that's the fact we have to deal with, and IMHO the solution is to
push the same changes to all releases wherever p
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 19:25 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Bad data is worse than no data.
>
> I disagree. As "bad" as the data is, it can't be worse than claiming users
> want, or worse, "need", conservative updates without any evidence whatsoever
> as has been done!
Wro
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> They aren't voted in. The range voting method does not vote people in
>> or out.. it determines who the majority of people are most likely to
>> 'live' with. Basically it tries to remove the emotional political e
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 09:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > So I'd love to have multi-level policy, but in my opinion it should get
> > harder and harder to push an update as the release gets older, not
> > easier.
>
>
> In general I'm in agr
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:04 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > So this is kind of funny. You'd rather see testing become/less/
> > rigorous as the age of a release grows, and you want the most rigorous
> > testing done in rawhide. That's quite the opposite of what many o
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Fedora security updates are regularly given no testing and are pushed
> directly to stable. Perhaps you should classify your updates with a
> severity of security.
That doesn't work because security updates require security team approval
(another silly policy which wa
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Perl6-Bible/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv8285
Modified Files:
perl-Perl6-Bible.spec
Log Message:
- Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
Index: perl-Perl6-Bible.spec
=
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 19:40 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> There are changes
> which don't need testing, for example if a patch was dropped because we
> thought it wasn't needed anymore, and it turns out the patch is still
> needed, readding the patch needs no testing whatsoever because the patch
Do what thou wilt
shall be the whole of the Law.
On 5/4/10, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> 2010/5/4 Thomas Spura :
>>> Am Montag, den 03.05.2010, 22:37 -0400 schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
>
Peter Jones wrote:
> I'm sorry you don't like it, but you've had ample occasion to come up with
> a better idea, and you have roundly refused to make any attempt at doing
> so.
"I'm sorry you don't like my plate of Merde Provençale, but you've had ample
occation to come up with a better recipe fo
On Tue, 04 May 2010 19:10:38 +0200
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > That's another problem with the poll. "Adventurous" means different
> > things to different people, so you can't assume that everybody is
> > responding to the same thing.
>
> "Adventurous" has quite an implicatio
Jesse Keating wrote:
> Bad data is worse than no data.
I disagree. As "bad" as the data is, it can't be worse than claiming users
want, or worse, "need", conservative updates without any evidence whatsoever
as has been done!
In fact I can bring you non-statistical evidence for the opposite: The
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Any one of those can invalidate the mathematical tests you say to run
> as they require random pools, controls on populations polled, and
> non-leading questions. People keep telling you this and you seem to
> keep ignoring it.
I know the poll is far from perfect. But
Thomas Janssen wrote:
> Well, i don't want to kill your dreams, but to be a packager means nothing
> ;)
Yeah, even being a FESCo member is not of much use against a block of 8
other members and the whole Board all voting the same way. :-(
And in fact this observation is what started this whole t
Jesse Keating wrote:
> That's another problem with the poll. "Adventurous" means different
> things to different people, so you can't assume that everybody is
> responding to the same thing.
"Adventurous" has quite an implication of breakage. A milder term would
probably have given an even HIGHE
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Ricky Zhou (ri...@fedoraproject.org) said:
>> > Of course, this does not say 'how many computers out there have package
>> > X'. Maybe it fails and one needs to download a package twice and so on.
>> > But I think this would be a first great
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> They aren't voted in. The range voting method does not vote people in
> or out.. it determines who the majority of people are most likely to
> 'live' with. Basically it tries to remove the emotional political ends
> and find who the 'silent' majority want. How much it
Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> An average user wants a stable, working software distribution, with
> prompt patches and software enhancements. Since in general those are
> conflicting requirements, the Fedora community has to apply engineering
> judgement on what is the appropriate velocity of updates.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> So I'd love to have multi-level policy, but in my opinion it should get
> harder and harder to push an update as the release gets older, not
> easier.
In general I'm in agreement with this. But at the same time I'm
concerned that the policy
Jesse Keating wrote:
> So this is kind of funny. You'd rather see testing become/less/
> rigorous as the age of a release grows, and you want the most rigorous
> testing done in rawhide. That's quite the opposite of what many of us
> are trying to work toward, that is as the release moves from ra
Jesse Keating writes:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anybody else getting server error 500 when attempting to submit new
>> updates in bodhi?
> If the update had bugs listed in it, it could be failing due to the
> bugzilla outage. Now that the outage is over, can you re-
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Anybody else getting server error 500 when attempting to submit new
> updates in bodhi?
>
> regards, tom lane
If the update had bugs listed in it, it could be failing due to the
bugzilla outage. Now that the outage is ove
Anybody else getting server error 500 when attempting to submit new
updates in bodhi?
regards, tom lane
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 11:25 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Fedora Rawhide/Fedora N+1
> Yes, these need rigorous testing and QA. Policies and tests are being
> set in place that will make a better and brighter Fedora future.
> However, it seems that the same release-level criteria are eroding
Outage Notification: Red Hat Bugzilla
Red Hat Bugzilla has currently an planned outage that is taking longer
than expected, and is causing various Fedora services not to be
functional. We are working with upstream on recovering services as
fast as possible
To convert UTC to your local time, take
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
