Has anyone noticed $SUBJECT happening? It happens to me a lot here in FL USA,
maybe upwards of 1/3 of the time.
Anyone think of a reason not to file an enhancement request bug as follows?
I keep in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf the following:
minrate=6000
This is to avoid having any slow mirror provide larg
Hi,
This morning, bodhi2 doesn't allow me to submit an update. After a
seemingly successful login-in, when trying to submit an update, a popup
pops up telling me:
"ACL validation mechanism was unable to determine ACLs"
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:05:35 -0600
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 05:04 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:34:14 -0600
> > Orion Poplawski wrote:
> >
> >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
> >>
> >>depchecklibwps-0.4.1-1.fc21(x86
On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 17:04 -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
> When I look into the specfile of libreoffice in the f21 branch, I
> don't
> actually see a Requires on libwps for fedora, just a BuildRequires:
Shared library dependencies are auto-generated. They don't appear in
the spec file.
--
Adam Willi
I am re-retiring create-tx-configuration. I kept it around after Sparks
retired it in case we needed it for the transition away from transifex, and
that's done, and we didn't.
-- Pete
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedor
On 08/26/2015 05:04 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:34:14 -0600
Orion Poplawski wrote:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
depchecklibwps-0.4.1-1.fc21(x86_64) a
day ago
shows passed:
TAP version 13
1..1
ok - depcheck for Koji b
Am 27.08.2015 um 02:21 schrieb Solomon Peachy:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 05:53:36PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
A better solution would be to add a mechanism that allows you to use
your own signing keys.
That way you have both 1) install self built extensions and 2) the
added security.
..and (3) a wa
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 01:58:32PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Making this public on devel@, since there has been:
>
> No response.
> No activity in pkgdb.
> No activity in koji.
>
> [...]
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:12:04 +0200
> From: mschwendt
> To: geeqie
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 05:53:36PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> A better solution would be to add a mechanism that allows you to use
> your own signing keys.
> That way you have both 1) install self built extensions and 2) the
> added security.
..and (3) a way for malware to install its own key, render
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 14:34:14 -0600
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
>
> depchecklibwps-0.4.1-1.fc21(x86_64) a
> day ago
>
> shows passed:
>
> TAP version 13
> 1..1
> ok - depcheck for Koji build libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 05:53:36PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Richard Z wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:12:25PM +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> >> Their FAQ is constantly updated:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing#FAQ
> >>
> >> I'm
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 04:56:07PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > What could pkgdb do against this? Automatically retire a package after it
> > has
> > been orphaned more than X days? Automatically send the email?
> > This sounds a lot like the cron jobs Till is running.
>
> Exactly these ... and
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
depchecklibwps-0.4.1-1.fc21(x86_64) a day ago
shows passed:
TAP version 13
1..1
ok - depcheck for Koji build libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
---
arch: x86_64
item: libwps-0.4.1-1.fc21
outcome: PASSED
type: koji
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2015-08-27 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2015-08-27 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2015-08-27 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2015-08-27 1
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 '2015-08-26 18:00 UTC'
Links to all tickets belo
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Richard Z wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:12:25PM +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
>> Their FAQ is constantly updated:
>>
>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing#FAQ
>>
>> I'm not sure if there is a valid practical reason to refuse submitting the
Missing expected images:
Kde Live i386
Kde Live x86_64
Kde Disk armhfp
No images in this compose but not the previous.
Images in the previous compose but not this:
Kde Live i386
Kde Live x86_64
Scientific_kde Live x86_64
Scientific_kde Live i386
Kde Disk armhfp
Failed openQA tests:
ID: 756 Te
Dne 26.8.2015 v 16:31 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:21:52PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 26.8.2015 v 15:19 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
>>> On 26 August 2015 at 02:40, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 25.8.2015 v 20:33 opensou...@till.name napsal(a):
> and will b
Missing expected images:
Generic Boot x86_64
Generic Boot i386
No images in this compose but not the previous.
Images in the previous compose but not this:
Generic Boot i386
Cloud atomic Disk x86_64
Scientific_kde Live x86_64
Robotics Live i386
Robotics Live x86_64
Cloud base Vagrant x86_64
Sci
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:21:52PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 26.8.2015 v 15:19 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
> > On 26 August 2015 at 02:40, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> Dne 25.8.2015 v 20:33 opensou...@till.name napsal(a):
> >>> and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks
> >>>
>
On 26/08/15 11:42 +, Fedora Branched Report wrote:
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-6.fc23.armv7hl requires libboost_serialization.so.1.57.0
Pushed to stable now:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc23
[adobe-source-libraries]
adobe-source-libraries-1.0.43-24.fc22.a
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2015-08-15, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> Out of all of those suggestions, the only one that might have any
>> = real value would be renaming "kernel" to "linux", but only if we
>> were interested in introducing other FOSS kernels as options into the
python-diff-cover 0.7.2 will be the last version in Fedora licensed
under the AGPL, and 0.8.0 will be the first under the Apache Software
License.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproje
On 2015-08-15, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Out of all of those suggestions, the only one that might have any
> = real value would be renaming "kernel" to "linux", but only if we
> were interested in introducing other FOSS kernels as options into the
> distribution. At this time, I seriously doubt anyone w
rubygem-apipie-bindings has changed license from GPLv3+ to MIT since
0.11.0 version.
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
Dne 26.8.2015 v 15:19 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
> On 26 August 2015 at 02:40, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 25.8.2015 v 20:33 opensou...@till.name napsal(a):
>>> and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks
>>>
>>> Package(co)maintainers Status C
On 26 August 2015 at 02:40, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 25.8.2015 v 20:33 opensou...@till.name napsal(a):
>> and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks
>>
>> Package(co)maintainers Status Change
>> ===
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:12:25PM +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> Their FAQ is constantly updated:
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing#FAQ
>
> I'm not sure if there is a valid practical reason to refuse submitting the
> addons that we ship to their signing service or if it
Dne 26.8.2015 v 14:12 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> Their FAQ is constantly updated:
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing#FAQ
>
> I'm not sure if there is a valid practical reason to refuse submitting
> the addons that we ship to their signing service or if it is against
> our
perl-Mozilla-CA-20150826-1.fc24 changes license from (MPLv1.1 or LGPLv2+
or GPLv2+) to (MPLv2.0).
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Their FAQ is constantly updated:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing#FAQ
I'm not sure if there is a valid practical reason to refuse submitting the
addons that we ship to their signing service or if it is against our
policies; at least mozilla-https-everywhere has been signed.
Mozi
Making this public on devel@, since there has been:
No response.
No activity in pkgdb.
No activity in koji.
[...]
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:12:04 +0200
From: mschwendt
To: geeqie-owner
Subject: geeqie 1.2.1 and pkgdb requests
Hello!
1) There are pending requests in p
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 07:07:34PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 12.02.2015 um 18:53 schrieb Simo Sorce:
> >>Maybe it is only about preventing people from bundling the official
> >>Firefox version with dodgy add-ons. Not downright malware, but things
> >>users may not actually want without r
Compose started at Wed Aug 26 05:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[ScientificPython]
ScientificPython-2.8-20.fc22.i686 requires libmpi.so.1
[apache-scout]
apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.juddi:ud
I know about 3 guys not being able to attend the meeting tomorrow,
including me. If somebody else is volunteering to organize the meeting
(which should be at 12pm UTC this week), feel free to do so. Otherwise,
consider this week canceled.
Honza
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
Dne 25.8.2015 v 20:33 opensou...@till.name napsal(a):
> and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks
>
> Package(co)maintainers Status Change
> ==
> apache-poi orph
36 matches
Mail list logo
