Hi,
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> On 03/25/2014 08:42 AM, Cole Robinson wrote:
>>
>> On 03/24/2014 08:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 04:41:29PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
An alternative would be to reassign every open me
Hi,
I'm not using Gnote any more. I've moved to bijiben a while back. Would
any one like to take over the package as a primary maintainer? I don't
mind helping with updates from time to time since they're generally
quite easy, but since I don't use it at all I'm not the best choice for
a primary m
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> My point is that it must ALSO be possible to install the preferred desktop
> directly, without installing GNOME first.
Exactly this.
Installing MATE from the spin is not exactly the same thing as
installing it from the netinstall or the DVD
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Christopher wrote:
> I also would like to see 1.7.0 stick around for awhile. Not
> necessarily as the default, but at least available in the repos. As it
> stands, it's difficult to use a modern Fedora on projects that are
> still developing against JDK 1.6.
+1.
I also would like to see 1.7.0 stick around for awhile. Not
necessarily as the default, but at least available in the repos. As it
stands, it's difficult to use a modern Fedora on projects that are
still developing against JDK 1.6.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Tue, M
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting Wednesday at 18:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '-MM-DD HH:MM UTC'
Links to all tickets belo
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
703
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5620/bugzilla-3.4.14-2.el6
132
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-12079/bip-0.8.9-1.el6
50
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA
The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
703
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5
193
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11560/fail2ban-0.8.10-4.el5
157
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/
On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 17:51 -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
> There was a bug about that in the past, but we rejected changing the default
> range. Libvirt and xen and qemu have all used the assumption of starting at
> port 5900 for too long, we didn't want to deal with any potential fallout for
> some
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 05:09:09PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >> I said it's "madness" and "totally wacky" to NOT HAVE THE OPTION of
>> >> installing your desktop directly, before first installing GNOME. That is
>> >> also what I said "almo
On 03/25/2014 05:43 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 18:24 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
>> In /etc/libvirt/qemu.conf you can set remote_display_port_{min,max}
>> to control the port range used
>
> So that is awesome thank you.
>
> Given that by default virt-manager/
On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 18:24 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In /etc/libvirt/qemu.conf you can set remote_display_port_{min,max}
> to control the port range used
So that is awesome thank you.
Given that by default virt-manager/libvirt/qemu listens to
127.0.0.0:PORT as opposed to 0.0.0.0:PORT
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 05:09:09PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> I said it's "madness" and "totally wacky" to NOT HAVE THE OPTION of
> >> installing your desktop directly, before first installing GNOME. That is
> >> also what I said "almost all users are NOT going to put up with".
> > I haven't hea
Here is a gist containing the output of attempting to compile the program
after installing the clang package on each platform I mentioned:
https://gist.github.com/TylerBrock/9771402
-Tyler
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Tyler Brock wrote:
> To my knowledge it was originally based on CentOS
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:41:19PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> I said it's "madness" and "totally wacky" to NOT HAVE THE OPTION of
>> installing your desktop directly, before first installing GNOME. That is
>> also what I said "almost all
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:41:19PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I said it's "madness" and "totally wacky" to NOT HAVE THE OPTION of
> installing your desktop directly, before first installing GNOME. That is
> also what I said "almost all users are NOT going to put up with".
I haven't heard anyon
Adam Williamson wrote:
> *My* point is that you should make your rhetoric match your point. Two
> or three of those quotations were direct rips from your previous emails
> on the topic. If you don't actually mean those things, then I suggest
> not writing them.
I said it's "madness" and "totally w
Reposted from
http://fedoramagazine.org/five-things-in-fedora-this-week-2014-03-25/
Fedora is big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This new feature
will highlight interesting happenings in five different areas every
week. It won’t be comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries
with
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Um. Are you sure this is what is happening? Are you sure these aren't
> set as systemwide connections?
NetworkManager 0.9 stores all connections systemwide, with permissions
optionally restricting them to specific users.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel
On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 21:07 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I think this is rather overstating the case. I certainly don't think
> > (and I already wrote) that it's enough to make everyone happy, but I
> > think it actually is what some people want. Quite a lot of people
> >
Adam Williamson wrote:
> I think this is rather overstating the case. I certainly don't think
> (and I already wrote) that it's enough to make everyone happy, but I
> think it actually is what some people want. Quite a lot of people
> install Ubuntu, for instance, and then add on GNOME or KDE or so
Please keep java 1.7.0 around for some time. It would make moving easier if we
have to jump back for a build or two.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
- Original Message -
> From: "Omair Majid"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9
2014-03-25 16:20 GMT-03:00 Adam Williamson :
> On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 16:19 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> > Hi Fedora folks,
> >
> > Since NetworkManager I suffer the same issue, release after release, ok,
> > it's not a Fedora issue
> >
> > If I preserve the home partition and perform a newly inst
On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 16:19 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> Hi Fedora folks,
>
> Since NetworkManager I suffer the same issue, release after release, ok,
> it's not a Fedora issue
>
> If I preserve the home partition and perform a newly installation, eg
> f19->f20 NetworkManager configurations pe
Hi Fedora folks,
Since NetworkManager I suffer the same issue, release after release, ok,
it's not a Fedora issue
If I preserve the home partition and perform a newly installation, eg
f19->f20 NetworkManager configurations per user are lost. I think that
NM should respect the user settings a
* Mikolaj Izdebski [2014-03-24 11:55]:
> That's exactly the problem. We need to use a modified version of
> java-1.8.0-openjdk with extra provides and adjusted priorities for
> alternatives.
I have started a new java-1.8.0-openjdk build that should fix this:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/bu
On 03/25/2014 08:42 AM, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 03/24/2014 08:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 04:41:29PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
An alternative would be to reassign every open merge review to the component
in question, and let maintainers handle it as they like.
Thou
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:06:31PM -0600, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So I've found a 'bug'. I have a group of developers who use
> vagrant/libvirt to develop against. We use VNC since we are a
> distributed team to connect to each other's desktops/workstations for
> when we're at th
On 03/25/2014 02:06 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So I've found a 'bug'. I have a group of developers who use
> vagrant/libvirt to develop against. We use VNC since we are a
> distributed team to connect to each other's desktops/workstations for
> when we're at the 'huh this makes
Hello,
So I've found a 'bug'. I have a group of developers who use
vagrant/libvirt to develop against. We use VNC since we are a
distributed team to connect to each other's desktops/workstations for
when we're at the 'huh this makes no sense'.
If libvirt/qemu-system-x86_64 starts before vino-
* Mikolaj Izdebski [2014-03-24 11:41]:
> On 03/22/2014 06:15 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > Given the known large number of failures (OptionalJavadocs says "80% build
> > failure rate" without saying that all are JavaDoc-related), we really
> > should do a mass rebuild to identify which packages fa
On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 15:20 -0400, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> WG meeting will be at 16:00 UTC, 17:00 Central Europe, 12:00 (noon)
> Boston, 9:00 San Francisco, 1:00 Tokyo in #fedora-meeting on Freenode.
Today's meeting was canceled since there were only hhorak, drieden and
me present.
> == Topi
On 03/25/2014 01:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
For the record Fedora is not a bleeding edge distro anymore or first in anything
maybe some people should consider the difference between "leading" and
"bleeding"
smart: leading if thi
Am 25.03.2014 15:54, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
> On 03/25/2014 02:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> stop your destructive FUD, without users developers and contributors are
>> *meaningless*
>> and with throwing alpha-state software to the users and make them bleed all
>> the
>> time you will e
Everyone in this thread:
Please re-read our code of conduct (in the footer of every single
message).
Stop attacking people.
Please stick to constructive comments about ideas instead.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://
On 03/25/2014 02:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
stop your destructive FUD, without users developers and contributors
are*meaningless*
and with throwing alpha-state software to the users and make them bleed all the
time you will end in no users at all
if you don't understand that, don't care for u
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:59:34 +0100
Jan Horak wrote:
> On 03/06/2014 09:24 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > On 03/06/2014 10:24 AM, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Will the subject packages be included in epel 7? I don't see them
> >> listed on the web pages at
> >> http://dl.fedoraprojec
Am 25.03.2014 15:22, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
> On 03/25/2014 01:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
For the record Fedora is not a bleeding edge distro anymore or first in
anything
>>> maybe some people should consider the
On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 09:24 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I agree with Harald here. I think some people have always wanted it to be,
> but Fedora never really has been chartered to be "bleeding". To quote the
> "first" foundation more fully:
>
> First represents our commitment to innovation. We
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:18:58PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> It's a pity though that nobody in Fedora is actively working on getting
>> rid of legacy cruft. I really wished we had some people who oversee
>> deprecating things more
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:29:12AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > I like the idea of actually revisiting the list and deciding what to do,
> > although pulling them out of the repository seems unnecessarily drastic.
> This always winds up being the suggestion. Nobody actually does
> anything about i
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:29:12AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > I like the idea of actually revisiting the list and deciding what to do,
>> > although pulling them out of the repository seems unnecessarily drastic.
>> This always winds up b
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:07:43PM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > Who the hell wants to install Gnome to install MATE or KDE or XFCE?
> Nobody, it's madness.
I don't think anyone wants to _have_ to, but I think it would be great if we
made it _easy to_ for people who _do_ have Gnome installed
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:29:12AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > I like the idea of actually revisiting the list and deciding what to do,
>> > although pulling them out of the repository seems unnecessarily drastic.
>> This always winds up b
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:07:35PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >> Alternative idea -- maybe identify all packages which are not ciritcal and
> >> have an open merge review
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:07:35PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Alternative idea -- maybe identify all packages which are not ciritcal and
>> have an open merge review. Take those packages out of the repository.
>> Then revisit the list
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > For the record Fedora is not a bleeding edge distro anymore or first in
> > anything
> maybe some people should consider the difference between "leading" and
> "bleeding"
> smart: leading if things are ready
> dumb: bleeding for
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:07:35PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Alternative idea -- maybe identify all packages which are not ciritcal and
> have an open merge review. Take those packages out of the repository.
> Then revisit the list and formulate a plan on what to do with thoes (even if
> the
On 03/24/2014 08:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 04:41:29PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
>>
>> An alternative would be to reassign every open merge review to the component
>> in question, and let maintainers handle it as they like.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
> Alternative idea -- may
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 04:41:29PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
> >>
> >> An alternative would be to reassign every open merge review to the
> >> component
> >> in question, and let maintainers handle it as t
Hi,
the Change Proposals Submission Deadline is coming soon, in two weeks [1]
- 2014-04-08. I'd like to ask especially WGs to work on the PRD/Tech
Specs break out into the Change Proposals - so the scope of release
can be evaluated and also for tracking purposes to knwo where we are
with Fedora 21/
On 25/03/14 03:00 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 17:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Saying that "nobody" wants this, it's "madness", "totally wacky",
"almost all users are NOT going to put up with this" is going rather
too
far. I think it's entirely worth the Desktop product
52 matches
Mail list logo
