On 26 May 2015 at 22:10, Reindl Harald wrote:
> you need learn to accept that software reaches the point where iot is just
> *read yand finished* just because it does what it is supposed to do and
> needs ntohing fixed or changed all the time
I assume you can point to several high-quality desktop
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:10:55PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >Yes, that shows you care as a packager and allows you to "rescue"
> >otherwise unloved applications
> who are you to define if an application is "loved"
I think there is a language / cultural barrier here — I don't think
Richard at
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting tomorrow at 18:00UTC (1:00pm EST) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
= Followups =
#topic #1441Packaging: Practices for Migrat
Am 26.05.2015 um 22:48 schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 26 May 2015 at 19:56, Hans de Goede wrote:
What does "dead" in that table mean? I see a lot of games marked this way,
and yes many games see little upstream activity, because once a game is
finished it typically really is finished.
Dead mean
sgallagh wrote:
> [...] Yes, I thought my new phrasing was more clearly expressing
> the original intent of the statement as I understood it. [...] I
> think we should perhaps discuss this at the weekly FESCo meeting.
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1446
> This is what I get for trying
On 26 May 2015 at 19:56, Hans de Goede wrote:
> What does "dead" in that table mean? I see a lot of games marked this way,
> and yes many games see little upstream activity, because once a game is
> finished it typically really is finished.
Dead means "no upstream release in 5 years".
> If I add
We are proud to announce the official release of Fedora 22 for aarch64,
the community-driven and community-built operating system now available
in Cloud, Server, and Workstation editions.
If that's all you need to hear, jump over to Get Fedora to download
-- or for current users, run the FedUp upg
Hi,
On 05/26/2015 05:33 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
Quite a few people are going to be installing Fedora 22 in the coming
days, searching for things in the software center and not finding
their esoteric GUI tool. This is because some applications still don’t
ship AppData files, which have become c
> Yes, that's the way I understand it too. The distinction between local
> and remote is that remote attacks are in general more likely and thus
> dangerous.
> This is a good assumption - I'm sure that on most installations of Fedora
> there's just one or a few trusted users, and they outnumber ins
Hello,
> > Nevertheless, you raise an interesting question in general. The way
> > I understand the motivation for the restriction is to avoid any
> > chance of attack or unexpected access over the network. [...]
>
> OK, so the question is - are we (still) trying to preclude -local-
> escalation
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 15:33 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 05/26/2015 12:10 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > Something needs to be done, but I'm not sure
> > exactly what.
>
> IMO, all this should not be a problem, if collaborative maintenance
> works.
>
> What I mean, IMO, critical packages shou
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> critical packages should have a sufficient number of co-maintainers, who
> should be presumed to be sufficiently familiar with a package to provide
> enough karma, which would allow such packages to pass quickly
Good point... and for thos
On Sun, 2015-05-24 at 14:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 07:24:07AM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> >
> > zbyszek wrote:
> >
> > > [...]
> > > Clarification: this change did not touch this part of the policy:
> > > that
> > > definition got copied over fro
Quite a few people are going to be installing Fedora 22 in the coming
days, searching for things in the software center and not finding
their esoteric GUI tool. This is because some applications still don’t
ship AppData files, which have become compulsory in the workstation
spin for this release. L
Andrew Haley skrev den 2015-05-26 12:10:
On 19/05/15 16:20, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Martin Stransky wrote:
is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security
fixes by Fedora update system?
For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after official Mozilla
release which is re
Am 26.05.2015 um 13:26 schrieb Jiri Eischmann:
Reindl Harald píše v Út 19. 05. 2015 v 10:45 +0200:
Am 19.05.2015 um 10:38 schrieb Martin Stransky:
Hi guys,
is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security
fixes by Fedora update system?
For instance Firefox packages are r
We don't need to complicate things, whenever such critical updates come
along, the maintainers can post a message here and in the users ml or even
in the forum (somewhere it will be immediately visible). A template for a
message detailing the bodhi-karma process, with links to the relevant page
for
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If y
FYI,
The rubygem-logging license changed from "MIT and (GPLv2 or Ruby or
BSD)" to "MIT"
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Hi,
I plan to rebase poppler in rawhide to poppler-0.33.0 during the next week.
There are several API changes and soname bump of the base library
libpoppler.so.*.
I've prepared a scratch build of poppler-0.33.0 against which you can
test your packages. You can find the build here:
http://koji.f
On 05/26/2015 12:10 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Something needs to be done, but I'm not sure
exactly what.
IMO, all this should not be a problem, if collaborative maintenance works.
What I mean, IMO, critical packages should have a sufficient number of
co-maintainers, who should be presumed to b
Hello Timotheus,
the mono crashes during build process on ppc64. For more details please
take a look
at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225035
Than
Am 18.05.2015 um 13:50 schrieb Timotheus Pokorra:
Hello Dan,
first update
srpm builds fine on f22/s390x
mono segfaults when runn
Reindl Harald píše v Út 19. 05. 2015 v 10:45 +0200:
>
> Am 19.05.2015 um 10:38 schrieb Martin Stransky:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security
> > fixes by Fedora update system?
> >
> > For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after offi
On 19/05/15 16:20, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Martin Stransky wrote:
>> is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security
>> fixes by Fedora update system?
>>
>> For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after official Mozilla
>> release which is really bad.
>>
>> Any idea here
Compose started at Tue May 26 05:15:04 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[OpenTK]
OpenTK-1.1-1.4c.fc22.noarch requires mono(mscorlib) = 0:2.0.0.0
OpenTK-1.1-1.4c.fc22.noarch requires mono(System.Xml) = 0:2.0.0.0
OpenTK-1
Hi
Taken!
can you take this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826038 ?
thanks in advance
gil
Il 26/05/2015 09:16, Till Hofmann ha scritto:
Hi everyone,
I'm looking for a reviewer for orocos-kdl:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076517
I'll be happy to review a package in
Hi everyone,
I'm looking for a reviewer for orocos-kdl:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076517
I'll be happy to review a package in return.
Thanks,
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct
27 matches
Mail list logo
