On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:24:33AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/08/2013 08:02 AM, David Tardon wrote:
> >On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 03:29:57AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>Shall we talk about how Red Hat employees have been granted all
> >>kinds of privileges within our community
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:27:18AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 10/08/2013 06:02 AM, David Tardon wrote:
> >I respectfully suggest that you be silent if you do not know the facts.
> >Your credibility is diminishing rapidly with every untrue statement you
> >put forth.
>
> You did com
Hello,
The author of uwsgi has decided to change the license:
> GPL2 + linking exception
>
> instead of GPL2
From http://lists.unbit.it/pipermail/uwsgi/2013-October/006516.html
This announcement was made after 1.9.17 so the new license should come
into effect in 1.9.18.
Anyone knows how to prop
On 10/8/2013 5:20 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/08/2013 11:08 PM, David wrote:
>> On 10/8/2013 1:36 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2013 07:07 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
A big red box with:
*This message could be a scam.* The sender's account may have been
compromised and
On 10/08/2013 11:08 PM, David wrote:
On 10/8/2013 1:36 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 10/08/2013 07:07 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
A big red box with:
*This message could be a scam.* The sender's account may have been
compromised and used to send malicious messages. If this message seems
suspicious, l
On 10/8/2013 1:36 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/08/2013 07:07 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>>
>> A big red box with:
>>
>> *This message could be a scam.* The sender's account may have been
>> compromised and used to send malicious messages. If this message seems
>> suspicious, let us know and then al
On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> People are supporting me plenty privately
This answer does not hold up to scrutiny as a response to Jirka's inquiry. Such
an arrangement requires publicly visible proxies to be credible. An alternative
arrangement is for your missio
The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
534
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5
49
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11276/ssmtp-2.61-21.el5
25
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
534
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5620/bugzilla-3.4.14-2.el6
49
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11274/ssmtp-2.61-21.el6
10
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between
provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]?
Here is another case of lack of communication between people touchi
On Ter, 2013-10-08 at 21:02 +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> hi,
>
> 3.5.8.2 was released time ago with
> several bugs fixed: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/959946
>
> Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 3.5.8.1
>
> Welcome to phpMyAdmin 3.5.8.2, a security release.
Well bug says phpMyAdmin-4.0.8
Hi,
Thank you for sharing that sad issue :(
i wish that we could review regularly all packages but that's obviously not
feasible.
What is doable:
* automated review of packages: git hooks ? regular mass fedora-review
checks ? triggering a mail to a list ? our scm watchdogs do a great job at
spotti
# F20 Beta Blocker Review meeting #3
# Date: 2013-10-09
# Time: 16:00 UTC (12:00 EDT, 09:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Everyone's favorite weekly activity is almost upon us once again. We'll
be holding another blocker review meeting tomorrow and while the list
of b
Hi!
This is a friendly reminder - all Changes has to be 100% complete in
one week - by Tue Oct 15 2013, see the current schedule [1].
Please make sure to update state of yours Change(s) bug(s) on time.
In case of any problems, let me know, we will try to find solution.
Expected bug state is ON_QA
hi,
3.5.8.2 was released time ago with
several bugs fixed: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/959946
Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 3.5.8.1
Welcome to phpMyAdmin 3.5.8.2, a security release.
3.5.8.2 (2013-07-28)
- [security] Fix self-XSS in "Showing rows", see PMASA-2013-8
- [security] Fix self-XSS
The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
534
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5
48
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11276/ssmtp-2.61-21.el5
24
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO
On 10/08/2013 07:07 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
A big red box with:
*This message could be a scam.* The sender's account may have been
compromised and used to send malicious messages. If this message seems
suspicious, let us know and then alert the sender as well (in some way
other than email). Le
> That said, please don't top-post: [1]
Also, please trim irrelevant material [1]
> [1]
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines#If_You_Are_Replying_to_a_Message
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Co
I was looking for examples of nice packages for upcoming packaging workshop we
are doing in Brno. I made the terrible mistake of doing fedpkg clone
python-urlgrabber.
If there was some normal packaging issue I'd most likely just file a bug in
bugzilla, but this made my blood boil. This is one of o
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/47551/0001-Ticket-47551-logconv-V-does-not-produce-unindexed-se.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Björn Persson
wrote:
> Christopher Meng wrote:
> >Are there any people not seeing this and using non-gmail services?
>
> I don't use Gmail, and I suppose I'm not seeing "this", because I have
> no idea what "this" that you guys see is. Today's Rawhide report looks
I've been kicking this idea around for a bit and have chatted a little
with people on IRC but as we're looking to start up development on
taskbot, I want to have a larger discussion on two issues: where do we
host code and what do we want to use for dev support tools (issue
tracking, code review et
Christopher Meng wrote:
>Are there any people not seeing this and using non-gmail services?
I don't use Gmail, and I suppose I'm not seeing "this", because I have
no idea what "this" that you guys see is. Today's Rawhide report looks
quite similar to yesterday's.
--
Björn Persson
Sent from my c
NOTE: The 32- and 64-bit DVDs, the 64-bit Desktop Live, the 32-bit
Security Spin, and the 64-bit LXDE and Security Spins are over their
respective size targets.
As per the Fedora 20 schedule [1], Fedora 20 Beta Test Compose 2 (TC2)
is now available for testing. Content information, including chang
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between
> provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]?
> Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching
> the same package.
>
> On Aug 8,
Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between
provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]?
Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching
the same package.
On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted
update FE
commit 5e4e207923459f33c33f0dc71a8a90768fdfcf89
Author: Bill Pemberton
Date: Tue Oct 8 10:41:36 2013 -0400
update to version 0.860
fixes typos in documentation
.gitignore|1 +
perl-Rose-Object.spec |8 ++--
sources |2 +-
3 files changed,
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Rose-Object:
34d662a480065ea4fb6ff47fbe2e6ca3 Rose-Object-0.860.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mail
commit 11731354c849a1f139ad46cf13e5963ef19f2b89
Author: Bill Pemberton
Date: Tue Oct 8 10:32:24 2013 -0400
Update to version 0.539
Fixes typos in the documentation
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Rose-DateTime.spec |8 ++--
sources |2 +-
3 file
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Rose-DateTime:
0cb5d39b141f15829c0d6ceb529faa27 Rose-DateTime-0.539.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016693
Bug ID: 1016693
Summary: updates-testing MODULE_COMPAT confusion
Product: Fedora
Version: 20
Component: perl-Language-Expr
Severity: low
Assignee: mhron...@redhat.com
Are there any people not seeing this and using non-gmail services?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> In parted we have a signed upstream package and a detached signature. In
> the pkg git we have the signer's public key and in %prep it runs gpg.
>
> Source0: ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.xz
> Source1: ftp://ftp.gnu.org
Fine now. Weird.
Sorry for the noise. And post-posting.
-J
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Fedora Branched Report <
rawh...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Compose started at Tue Oct 8 09:15:02 UTC 2013
>
> Broken deps for armhfp
> --
> [b
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Path-IsDev:
81dd4d8b48602dbbaf2fc972a44d2d15 Path-IsDev-0.6.0.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma
Compose started at Tue Oct 8 09:15:02 UTC 2013
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[blueman]
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires obex-data-server >= 0:0.4.3
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires gvfs-obexftp
[bwm-ng]
bwm-ng-0.6
p
Sent from Google Nexus 4
On Oct 2, 2013 1:50 AM, "Till Maas" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jarod Wilson, the current lirc maintainer, announced that he wants
> someone else to maintain lirc due to lack of time/interest[0]. Probably
> his other four packages need a new maintainer as, well[1]:
>
> https://ad
On 2013-10-06 15:13, Rave it wrote:
Am Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:59:20 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 19:50:45 +0200
From: Till Maas
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: jwil...@fedoraproject.org
Subject: New maintainer for
On 10/08/2013 07:00 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
Hi Johann,
you use the word *the community* in your emails a lot, but I don't see
many others supporting your opinion,
Hi Jiri
There are other ways to than being visible to show support and sometimes
it's not the best strategy to do so.
When d
On 2013-10-07 13:56, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
Hi Jóhann,
I do agree with you that the interaction between Red Hat and Fedora
needs to be clearer, and that currently it is a bit vaguely defined and
thus it gives ground to conspiracy theories and feelings of
disenfranchisement.
Th
On 10/08/2013 06:02 AM, David Tardon wrote:
I respectfully suggest that you be silent if you do not know the facts.
Your credibility is diminishing rapidly with every untrue statement you
put forth.
You did comprehend I was not only talking about PP right?
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists
On 10/05/2013 05:34 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 10/04/2013 06:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 03:14:27PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Why should the community participate in this when it turns out that
the the whole WG and the next proposal is nothing but
42 matches
Mail list logo
