Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 06/26/2014 09:40 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:42:17 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Another idea that leaps to mind is to add more provenpackagers... have we set the bar too high so no one wants to apply? Trivial bug fixing across the project seems to be a reasonable

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 26/06/14 22:33, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 13:01:05 -0500 Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: On 2014-06-26 11:17, Richard Hughes wrote: On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: +1 from me! If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. From someone that touch

Re: Package onership

On 06/26/2014 11:34 PM, Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich wrote: Package NearTree is going to be dropped as it is not built for F21. Its maintainer, tmatsuu, was seen on koji in late 2012, September. I would like to take NearTree as it is reqiured for my rasmol package. I made a request in PkgDB, but who sh

Package onership

Hi! Package NearTree is going to be dropped as it is not built for F21. Its maintainer, tmatsuu, was seen on koji in late 2012, September. I would like to take NearTree as it is reqiured for my rasmol package. I made a request in PkgDB, but who should I notice to grant the rights? Dmitrij. --

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 01:27:23 +0200 Sandro Mani wrote: > On 27.06.2014 00:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: ...snip... > > - Not sure 'trivial' really covers the things you list in examples. > >FTBFS could be more than trivial depending on the patch. Perhaps > > the entire thing could be 'simple patches'

Re: yum install kernel-devel Installing & dnf install kernel-devel Installing also

Reverted installonly: kernel-devel should not be installonly. https://github.com/akozumpl/dnf/commit/e3856e6 # dnf --disablerepo \* --enablerepo rawhide-koji update kernel\* \*perf Dependencies resolved. ==

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

This is a really good idea. On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 16:55 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > - Should this be rawhide only? That would avoid 'trivial' patches that > cause a problem from affecting users that aren't as able to debug > them. No, since the primary use for this would probably be backport

Re: Self Introduction: Dennis Kliban (dkliban)

Welcome on board! Kenjiro Dennis Kliban writes: > I have been working with the ImageFactory (www.imgfac.org) team over the last > 18 months. During that time we developed a second image building project > called nova-image-builder > (https://github.com/redhat-imaging/novaimagebuilder). At t

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 27.06.2014 00:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:39:52 +0200 Sandro Mani wrote: So the thing that should be avoided IMO is not defining well enough how the procedure should work, to avoid getting swamped with patches which require additional work to apply. The requirement to fil

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:39:52 +0200 Sandro Mani wrote: > So the thing that should be avoided IMO is not defining well enough > how the procedure should work, to avoid getting swamped with patches > which require additional work to apply. The requirement to fill out > post a "New Package Request" s

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 2014-06-26 15:33, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 13:01:05 -0500 Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: This seems to be particularly needed around mass rebuilds, which IMHO should be an "all-hands-on-deck" time. For example, I've been going through the sizable F21FTBFS list[1][2], looking for arm-s

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 26.06.2014 22:47, Jeff Backus wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi > wrote: I'm not sure the entire group of provenpackagers would like to be notified of such trivial patches waiting. Is there a group of provenpackagers who would be will

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I'm not sure the entire group of provenpackagers would like to be > notified of such trivial patches waiting. Is there a group of > provenpackagers who would be willing to query for and apply these? > > Maybe a simple way to allow non-prove

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 13:01:05 -0500 Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On 2014-06-26 11:17, Richard Hughes wrote: > > On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: > >> +1 from me! > > > > If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. > > From someone that touches hundreds of differen

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: Deji Akingunola (fas: deji)

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 18:19:32 +0200 Sandro Mani wrote: > Hi, > > Given that no-one seems to know how to contact deji, I'd like to > request the takeover of scotch. as a fesco member I can ack this. We will be orphaning his packages and you can pick up scotch. kevin signature.asc Descriptio

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I think having a "trivial patch" policy and proven packager route of implementation is a great idea! On 06/26/2014 11:42 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > provenpackagers who would be willing to query for and apply these? > > Another idea that leaps to min

Re: Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 06:57:29 -0400 Andy Grimm wrote: > On Jun 18, 2014 5:28 PM, "Kevin Fenzi" wrote: ...snip... > > * sadmac - former email address cdah...@redhat.com > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packager/sadmac/ > > Point of contact: 1 > > Co-maintainer:0 > >

Re: Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:42:10 -0400 Adam Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 18:41 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > > * ssp - former email address sandm...@redhat.com > > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packager/ssp/ > > >

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:17:07 +0100 > Richard Hughes wrote: > >> On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: >> > +1 from me! >> >> If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. >> From someone that touches hundreds of di

Re: Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers

On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 18:41 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:28 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > * ssp - former email address sandm...@redhat.com > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packager/ssp/ > > Point of contact: 39 > > Co-maintainer:254 > > Watched: 0 >

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:42:17 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Another idea that leaps to mind is to add more provenpackagers... have we set the bar too high so no one wants to apply? Trivial bug fixing across the project seems to be a reasonable justification for giving out proven packager sta

Re: setterm impact changed

On 2014-06-26 13:24 (GMT-0500) Chris Adams composed: Felix Miata said: Now that the kernel is no longer putting the display to sleep and I can start X, I find that setterm command no longer applies only to the vttys. It's now coloring my Konsoles, which I do not want, and I don't see a way in

Re: yum install kernel-devel Installing & dnf install kernel-devel Upgrading

On 26.06.2014 09:39, Ales Kozumplik wrote: Hello, The globbing mechanism in DNF is still evolving and it is possible you are running into one of the cases that we omitted to implement. Or perhaps there is a different problem. Can I ask you to file a bug using https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_

Re: setterm impact changed (was: setterm syntax changed)

Once upon a time, Felix Miata said: > New problem. Now that the kernel is no longer putting the display to > sleep and I can start X, I find that setterm command no longer > applies only to the vttys. It's now coloring my Konsoles, which I do > not want, and I don't see a way in the setterm man pa

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 2014-06-26 11:17, Richard Hughes wrote: On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: +1 from me! If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. From someone that touches hundreds of different projects every month, I've found it's better to ask forgiveness than permissi

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 26.06.2014 19:04, Till Maas wrote: IMHO there is not a huge group needed to handle on-demand provenpackager tasks (as long as it is only required to review and apply a patch to dist-git and potential debugging/scratch building is done before). Good point, adding to the previous conditions

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:42:17AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I'm not sure the entire group of provenpackagers would like to be > notified of such trivial patches waiting. Is there a group of > provenpackagers who would be willing to query for and apply these? I am. > Another idea that leaps to

Re: setterm impact changed (was: setterm syntax changed)

On 2014-06-26 03:03 (GMT-0400) Felix Miata composed: On 2014-06-25 23:54 (GMT-0700) Samuel Sieb composed: Felix Miata wrote: setterm --background blue --foreground white --bold --blank 59 --store That moved the error: setterm: argument error: --blank Perhaps the on/off a

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 26.06.2014 18:42, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:17:07 +0100 Richard Hughes wrote: On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: +1 from me! If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. From someone that touches hundreds of different projects every month

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:17:07 +0100 Richard Hughes wrote: > On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: > > +1 from me! > > If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. > From someone that touches hundreds of different projects every month, > I've found it's better to ask

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

Il 26/06/2014 18:17, Richard Hughes ha scritto: On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: +1 from me! If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. From someone that touches hundreds of different projects every month, I've found it's better to ask forgiveness than perm

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

On 26 June 2014 17:02, Simone Caronni wrote: > +1 from me! If it's a trivial patch then I think it makes sense to just do it. From someone that touches hundreds of different projects every month, I've found it's better to ask forgiveness than permission :) Richard -- devel mailing list devel@li

Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

Hi, From time to time, I see trivial patches posted in bugzilla which end up sitting there because the maintainer is too busy / gets bombarded with tons of bugzilla mails and misses that particular one / whatever reason. As a packager, sometimes it seems very hard to get such trivial patches

5tFTw: NetworkManager Feature Explosion, Waartaa Video Chat, Fedora Board on Fedora.next Products, Flock Planning, and Writing for the Magazine (2014-06-24)

Reposted from . Fedora is a big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This series highlights interesting happenings in five different areas every week. It isn’t comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries with links to each. Here are the fiv

Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

+1 from me! On Jun 26, 2014 5:51 PM, "Sandro Mani" wrote: > Hi, > > From time to time, I see trivial patches posted in bugzilla which end up > sitting there because the maintainer is too busy / gets bombarded with tons > of bugzilla mails and misses that particular one / whatever reason. As a > p

Re: GNU GPL licensed alphabet icon set

On 2014-06-25, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > https://github.com/lzap/foreman-dummy-icons > Just a bug report. The -draw "rectangle 0,0,20,20" argument is responsible for the frame at the edge of the picture. So if you paremetrized: -size ${SIZE}x${SIZE} argument, you need to change the 20's into

Re: Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers

On Jun 18, 2014 5:28 PM, "Kevin Fenzi" wrote: > > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for three package > maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive > maintainer policy to find out if they are still interested in > maintaining their packages (and if so, have th

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 21 v3

I'd like to claim the ownership of blktap and alliance. What should I do next? DIrectly request the ACL via bugzilla? Thanks. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduc

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 21 v3

> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:31:18AM +0700, Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich wrote: > > > Package(co)maintainers > > > > > > > > > === > > > NearTree tmatsuu > > > > > > The f

Re: yum install kernel = 11 Packages & dnf install kernel = Nothing to do

On 06/24/2014 04:23 AM, poma wrote: One exemplary example of how to or how to not to. # yum clean all Loaded plugins: langpacks Cleaning repos: rawhide Cleaning up everything # yum --enablerepo \* clean all Loaded plugins: langpacks Cleaning repos: fedora fedora-debuginfo fedora-rawhide-kernel

Re: future contributions and package updates jmarrero

Hi Joseph, On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 22:22 -0400, Joseph Marrero wrote: > Hello, > My FAS is : jmarrero > I can not update any of my packages for the time being, will know If I can > continue contributing in about a month. I can pass the ownership to who ever > wants to maintain the packages I curre

Re: setterm syntax changed

On 2014-06-25 23:54 (GMT-0700) Samuel Sieb composed: Felix Miata wrote: I think what's order dependent is a bug in the rewrite to require the double hyphen where previously a single did the job. I tried this: setterm --background blue --foreground white --bold --blank 59 --store Th