On 09/04/2014 09:01 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:50:42PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/04/2014 05:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Do we really need another systemd thread?
Yes, because Fedora has failed to discuss system and systemd development in
advance before they had
Still no actions.
According to Policy for nonresponsive package maintainers.
Takanori Matsuura did not respond on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1105916, contact email is silent
too.
Moreover, his last build on koji was in late 2012.
As for both above mentioned, I want to take o
Today at Go/No-Go meeting it was decided to slip Fedora 21 Alpha release
by one week due to unresolved blocker bugs [1] and no release candidate
available. More details in meeting minutes [2].
As a result, ALL MAJOR MILESTONES, and their dependent tasks, will be
pushed out by one week [3].
The n
On Thu, 04.09.14 12:19, Gregory Maxwell (gmaxw...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Digimer wrote:
> > This reminds me of the "Beefy Miracle" fiasco... Everyone complained after
> > it happened, but few said or did anything before then.
>
> The scope of systemd has crept dramat
On 09/04/2014 07:13 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 04.09.14 16:11, Sérgio Basto (ser...@serjux.com) wrote:
Hi,
[1]
since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091913
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
Once upon a time, Gregory Maxwell said:
> The scope of systemd has crept dramatically since the start. If the
> initial discussions of systemd said it would merge dhcp, udev, and
> that it would push binary logging, etc. Do you really think it would
> have gone without more vigorous opposition?
On September 4, 2014 at 3:19:09 PM, Gregory Maxwell
(gmaxw...@gmail.com(mailto:gmaxw...@gmail.com)) wrote:
> It should be perfectly acceptable to tell people "Fedora is not for you.”
I agree with this - although I suspect most of the long time Fedora users feel
a sense of loyalty and would rat
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Digimer wrote:
> This reminds me of the "Beefy Miracle" fiasco... Everyone complained after
> it happened, but few said or did anything before then.
The scope of systemd has crept dramatically since the start. If the
initial discussions of systemd said it would mer
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:50:42PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 05:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> >Do we really need another systemd thread?
>
> Yes, because Fedora has failed to discuss system and systemd development in
> advance before they had been deployed. Instead Fedora was c
I have to admit, I love the claim that systemd is "anti-Unix". Isn't the
fact that systemd makes use of systems that exist already, like DBus and
udev, following the Unix philosophy of letting programs worry about their
own problem space? The fact is, any system that is required to do system
mana
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:05:52PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 05:38 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> >>wouldn't it make sense to integrate a check into the processes, when people
> >>leave Redhat, that the packages in
Am 04.09.2014 um 17:11 schrieb Sérgio Basto:
> since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
> have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
> sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ? and others integration like crontab
> should be modular, for someone else c
On Thu, 04.09.14 16:11, Sérgio Basto (ser...@serjux.com) wrote:
> Hi,
> [1]
> since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
> have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
> sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ?
It's a set of tools to build an OS from, no
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:34:57 +0200
Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Hi,
> we (the Copr team) would like to allow uploading of source RPM to
> Copr. It seems that best way is to utilize dist-git [1]. Then Copr
> will fetch sources and spec file from dist-git and build SRC.RPM the
> same as Koji does now. A
- Original Message -
> Agenda:
> - Lennart's proposal discussion, especially in relation to /etc:
>
> http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
> http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/stateless.html
> - Open Floor
Phil, as I organize Akademy conferenc
Agenda:
- Lennart's proposal discussion, especially in relation to /etc:
http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/stateless.html
- Open Floor
Thanks & regards, Phil
--
Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-47
On 09/04/2014 05:38 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
wouldn't it make sense to integrate a check into the processes, when people
leave Redhat, that the packages in fedora are properly orphaned or get a new
owner?
Why would even someone'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1138351
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-File-Tail-0.99.3-21.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-File-Tail-0.99.3-21.el7
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
On 04/09/14 11:50 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/04/2014 05:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Do we really need another systemd thread?
Yes, because Fedora has failed to discuss system and systemd development
in advance before they had been deployed. Instead Fedora was confronted
with completed fact
On 09/04/2014 05:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Do we really need another systemd thread?
Yes, because Fedora has failed to discuss system and systemd development
in advance before they had been deployed. Instead Fedora was confronted
with completed facts.
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lis
On 09/04/2014 05:11 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> OTOH , the support of systemd is not good, we got bug opened and they
> are ignored as nothing happens, as for example bug
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1088619
The bug is unresolved so far, but it is not ignored.
At least there is a kn
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 11:14:59 -0400
Digimer wrote:
> On 04/09/14 11:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > Hi,
> > [1]
> > since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the
> > group have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
> > sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ? and
On 4 September 2014 06:01, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> And much like anyone else, people come and go. The difference is that
>> here, when
>> they leave, we know about it before emails start to bounce.
>>
> It's simply that the number of @RHs bei
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 16:11:37 +0100,
Sérgio Basto wrote:
Hi,
[1]
since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ? and others integration like crontab
should be modular, f
Hi,
we (the Copr team) would like to allow uploading of source RPM to Copr. It seems that best way is to utilize dist-git
[1]. Then Copr will fetch sources and spec file from dist-git and build SRC.RPM the same as Koji does now. And hopefuly
you will be able to use fedpkg to interact with Copr.
*sigh*
Could we stop ranting every time, we speak about systemd ? Not only,
it's tiresome but it does *not* help to fix the aforementioned issues.
systemd and its upstream are not perfect, but systemd gains vs loss
are by far positive.
About systemd-network, there are perfectly valid arguments to
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 10:11:58 -0500
Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Tomasz Torcz said:
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> > > wouldn't it make sense to integrate a check into the processes,
> > > when people leave Redhat, that the packages in fedora are
> >
user: limb set for spot acl: watchcommits of package: perl-File-Tail from: to:
Approved on branch: epel7
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-File-Tail
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel maili
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1138351
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--
You are receiving this m
user: limb set for spot acl: approveacls of package: perl-File-Tail from: to:
Approved on branch: epel7
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-File-Tail
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailin
user: limb set for spot acl: commit of package: perl-File-Tail from: to:
Approved on branch: epel7
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-File-Tail
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1138351
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1SCzp6tcPC&a=cc_unsubscribe
user: limb set for spot acl: watchbugzilla of package: perl-File-Tail from:
to: Approved on branch: epel7
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-File-Tail
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mail
On 04/09/14 11:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
Hi,
[1]
since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ? and others integration like crontab
should be modular, for someone else coul
Hi,
[1]
since Fedora have some responsibility, unfortunately I think the group
have some valid reasons , systemd should be the replacement of
sysvinit , a built in DHCP !? why ? and others integration like crontab
should be modular, for someone else could use his own crontab .
OTOH , the support o
Once upon a time, Tomasz Torcz said:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> > wouldn't it make sense to integrate a check into the processes, when people
> > leave Redhat, that the packages in fedora are properly orphaned or get a
> > new owner?
>
> Why would even so
I will be updating pugixml from 1.0 to 1.4 in rawhide shortly. This
changes the soname from the currently fedora defined "libpugixml.so.1.0"
to upstream's "libpugixml.so.1". Also, there are some compatibility
changes:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34775202/compat_reports/pugixml/1.0_to
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:56:20PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 02:26 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:01:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> >>BTW: Though this threat started with FAS, one should also
On 09/04/2014 02:26 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:01:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
BTW: Though this threat started with FAS, one should also consider to take
into account bugzilla accounts.
There are two aspects t
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 13:27 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I was curious of any of my packages depends on
> any of these I've run some repoqueries to see what
> depends on these, and we still have a ton of
> dependencies on these.
>
> So unless we want to drop a ton of packages, we real
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:01:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> BTW: Though this threat started with FAS, one should also consider to take
> into account bugzilla accounts.
There are two aspects to consider here:
* bugzilla is managed by RH IT,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:08:47AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> > maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive
> > maintainer policy to find out if they are still interested
On Thu 04 Sep 2014 01:35:53 PM CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:38:52AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> >
>> > > Greetings, we've been told that the e
- Original Message -
> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two 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 them update their email
On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
And much like anyone else, people come and go. The difference is that here, when
they leave, we know about it before emails start to bounce.
It's simply that the number of @RHs being involved into Fedora is quite
large, which makes this happen m
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I was curious of any of my packages depends on
> any of these I've run some repoqueries to see what
> depends on these, and we still have a ton of
> dependencies on these.
>
> So unless we want to drop a ton of packages, we really
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:38:52AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> > > maintainers are no longer vali
Hi,
As I was curious of any of my packages depends on
any of these I've run some repoqueries to see what
depends on these, and we still have a ton of
dependencies on these.
So unless we want to drop a ton of packages, we really
need someone to pick these up:
[hans@shalem ~]$ sudo repoquery --wha
On 09/04/2014 11:38 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
Why would even someone's employment status matter? Fedora is a community
project.
In an ideal world, yes.
Reality however tells, RH employees leaving RH and leaving the their
packages abandoned is a problem.
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
deve
Compose started at Thu Sep 4 07:15:02 UTC 2014
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[APLpy]
APLpy-0.9.8-5.fc21.noarch requires pywcs
[PyKDE]
PyKDE-3.16.6-14.fc20.armv7hl requires sip-api(10) >= 0:10.0
[PyQuante]
PyQuante-libint-
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 14:44 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two 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
Broken deps for i386
--
[APLpy]
APLpy-0.9.8-5.fc21.noarch requires pywcs
[PyKDE]
PyKDE-3.16.6-14.fc20.i686 requires sip-api(10) >= 0:10.0
[PyQuante]
PyQuante-libint-1.6.4-11.fc22.1.i686 requires libint(x86-32) =
0:1.1.
On 09/03/2014 09:58 AM, Kẏra wrote:
Testing has been great! I still really appreciate this repo. There have been
a few firefox releases plus Fedora 21 is no longer rawhide so that could use
its own repo. Any plans to update soon?
I've been able to find these two bugs (though I haven't been able
I've decided to orphan some packages:
ORBit2
at-spi
eog-plugins
gamin
gnome-themes
icon-naming-tools
libIDL
libglade2
libgnomecanvas
Please pick them up if you are interested in them.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedo
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> > maintainers are no long
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> maintainers are no longer valid.A I'm starting the unresponsive
> maintainer policy to
- Original Message -
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> > > maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two package
> > maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive
> > maintainer policy to find out if t
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two 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
- Original Message -
> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for two 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 them update their email
61 matches
Mail list logo
