Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL)

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 20:49 -0400, Eric Griffith wrote: > Adam have you gotten in touch with Upstream at all? Seen if maybe > they can > make changes on their end to make packaging any easier? I'm sure > some parts > of it are just a result of php being php, but you did mention > bundling for > pa

Re: Copr for FeedReader

On 09/02/2015 01:00 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 1.9.2015 v 22:00 janlukasgern...@freenet.de napsal(a): >> >> Hi, >> >> I was advised to ask on this list for help regarding setting up a copr >> repository. > > Why Copr and not Fedora official package? Is there something which > conflicts with Fedor

Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL)

On Sep 2, 2015 8:46 PM, "Adam Williamson" wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 11:00 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote: > > Il 31/08/2015 18:19, Adam Williamson ha scritto: > > > There isn't really a great alternative to ownCloud (that I know > > > of) if > > > you actually *want* a 'personal cloud server

Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL)

On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 11:00 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote: > Il 31/08/2015 18:19, Adam Williamson ha scritto: > > There isn't really a great alternative to ownCloud (that I know > > of) if > > you actually *want* a 'personal cloud server' with all the bits OC > > has, but I realized I just don't an

Re: Resources for upstream testing?

but we currently don't > have a user friendly way to find them. You currently have to look > through koji to find them [1]. > > Hope this helps! > > [0] > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7896/10927896/Fedora-Docker-Base-rawhide-20150902.x86_64.tar.xz

Re: Resources for upstream testing?

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 22:52:42 -0700 > Dave Johansen wrote: > > > I'm working on packaging hgsubversion ( > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221459 ) and I've run > > into an issue where some of the tests pass on F22 and F23 but fai

Orphaned Packages in branched (2015-09-02)

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

RE: Re: Copr for FeedReader

Thx :) Very helpful links. repo is now available here. Could someone test on 21 or 22 if I made a mistake? :) I already received a bug report about FeedReader crashing on Fedora, and I think it could be the packaging =/ > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Miroslav Suchý > Gesendet: Mi. 0

RE: Re: Copr for FeedReader

There is nothing wrong with FeedReader. I just thought copr is easier than getting it in the official repos.   -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: "Vít Ondruch" [vondr...@redhat.com] Gesendet: Mi. 02.09.2015 13:00 An: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Betreff: Re: Copr for FeedReader Dne 1.9.2

Orphaned Packages in rawhide (2015-09-02)

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

rpm-4.13.0-rc1 in rawhide

I just pushed the first release candidate for RPM rpm-4.13.0 into rawhide. It now comes with the final syntax for rich dependencies. Also we merged support for file signatures in the security.ima xattr and some smaller fixes. See http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2015-September/51.ht

Re: Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

On 09/02/2015 06:49 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Hi all, > > Today, I stumbled upon OPEN bugs [1] link on Upstream Release Monitoring > wiki page [2]. And the BZ/packages probably deserves cleanup. There are > several categories I identified as worrying: > > 1) Packages are retired but the bugs are k

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 14:24 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 09/02/2015 02:14 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 13:57 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > >> On 09/02/2015 12:47 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Sep 02, 20

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 02:14 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 13:57 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: On 09/02/2015 12:47 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: Re-sending this with a better

Re: Resources for upstream testing?

] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7896/10927896/Fedora-Docker-Base-rawhide-20150902.x86_64.tar.xz [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasks?start=0&state=all&view=tree&method=image&order=-id -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedora

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 13:57 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 09/02/2015 12:47 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > >>> Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 12:47 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) Yes, thanks -- I admit to having skimmed over it in my mail-catch

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 12:31 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) Yes, thanks -- I admit to having skimmed over it in my mail-catchup attempt. especially how the rings interact. As a

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 12:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) I read it last week. Perhaps the lack of commentary isn't because of the title. It's because there is nothing new here. The propo

Re: Resources for upstream testing?

On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 22:52:42 -0700 Dave Johansen wrote: > I'm working on packaging hgsubversion ( > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221459 ) and I've run > into an issue where some of the tests pass on F22 and F23 but fail on > Rawhide. I've done some simple debugging, but it would be

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 12:24 PM, Adam Miller wrote: On 08/31/2015 10:18 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: For today's meeting we didn't really use zodbot minute keeping features, so in the interest of sparking some discussion I'd like to recap. At Flock 2015 there was a 2 hour session on the subject of rings w

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On 09/02/2015 12:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:31:04PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: 5. Ring membership is at the source package level, not the binary package. If one source package's binary/noarch sub-package is in ring 0, all sub-packages are in ring 0. H. Are we

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > > Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) > > Yes, thanks -- I admit to having skimmed over it in my mail-catchup > attempt. > > > >especially how

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:24 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> (Also, the original definition included Anaconda because you need >> something to actually install Fedora Ring 0 with and that brought in >> GTK, etc).) > > I think 'not self-hosting'

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 15:24 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > (Also, the original definition included Anaconda because you need > something to actually install Fedora Ring 0 with and that brought in > GTK, etc).) I think 'not self-hosting' should be understood to imply 'not self- installing' - ie don't

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:31:04PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > >5. Ring membership is at the source package level, not the binary > > >package. If one source package's binary/noarch sub-package is in ring > > >0, all sub-packages are in ring 0. > > H. Are we sure about that? That means t

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 11:59:55AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) Yes, thanks -- I admit to having skimmed over it in my mail-catchup attempt. > >especially how the rings interact. As a side note, everyone agreed > >the word "rings

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) I read it last week. Perhaps the lack of commentary isn't because of the title. It's because there is nothing new here. The proposal boils down to "collection/classification

Re: Fedora Ring 0 definition

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) > > On 08/31/2015 10:18 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: >> >> On 08/31/2015 08:17 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: >> [snip] >>> >>> Minutes: >>> >>>

Release blocking deliverables for Fedora 23

Hi, in the past there was an issue with identification of deliverables which block a Fedora release. We were dealing with this issue specifically during Go/No-go meetings which is quite late for this kind of decisions. To solve this issue FESCo has started an activity [1] to identify these deliver

Fedora Ring 0 definition

Re-sending this with a better title so people might read it ;-) On 08/31/2015 10:18 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: On 08/31/2015 08:17 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: [snip] Minutes: Minut

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-09-02)

=== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2015-09-02) === Meeting started by jwb at 18:00:08 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2015-09-02/fesco.2015-09-02-18.00.log.html . Meeting summary --

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2015-09-03 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2015-09-03 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2015-09-03 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT 2015-09-03 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT 2015-09-03 1

Re: F23 System Wide Change: Glibc locale subpackaging

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 05:53:19PM +0200, Florian Festi wrote: > In theory, yes. In the end we'd need something like find-lang.sh that > actually spits out the packages to be included in the main spec file. > debug-info packages are done that way. But it is not pretty. It's not pretty behind the s

Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL)

On 2 September 2015 at 08:11, Remi Collet wrote: > Le 29/08/2015 23:27, Adam Williamson a écrit : >> Hi, folks. So I've been maintaining ownCloud for the last little >> while. Unfortunately I sat down today to try again and update the >> package to the latest upstream (8.1.1), and somewhere in the

Fedora 23 Branched 20150902 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud atomic Disk x86_64 Cloud base Disk i386 Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20150901: Robotics Live i386 Soas Live i386 Robotics Live x86_64 No images in 23 Branched 20150901 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 1 of 20 ID: 1132Test: x86_64 universa

Fedora Rawhide 20150902 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud base Disk i386 Images in this compose but not Rawhide 20150901: Kde Live i386 Security Live x86_64 Scientific_kde Live x86_64 Kde Live x86_64 Scientific_kde Live i386 Kde Disk armhfp Lxde Live i386 No images in Rawhide 20150901 but not this. Failed openQA tests:

Re: Packaging golang for secondary architectures, go-srpm-macros

On Monday, July 27, 2015 10:12:03 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 26.7.2015 v 14:03 Jan Chaloupka napsal(a): > > On 07/24/2015 03:36 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> Dne 9.7.2015 v 11:18 Jan Chaloupka napsal(a): > >>> Recommended use in spec file: > >>> 1) To choose the correct compiler: > >>> %ifarch %{gol

Re: Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

Dne 2.9.2015 v 16:10 Paul Wouters napsal(a): > On Wed, 2 Sep 2015, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> 3) Packages are updated, but the bug is kept open > >> I would suggest probably to close the bugs for 1st category, the >> packages from 2nd category should be orphaned and the packages from 3rd >> category s

[Bug 1259403] New: perl-Inline-C-0.76-1.fc24 FTBFS: tests fail with recent perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259403 Bug ID: 1259403 Summary: perl-Inline-C-0.76-1.fc24 FTBFS: tests fail with recent perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Inline-C

Re: Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015, Vít Ondruch wrote: 3) Packages are updated, but the bug is kept open I would suggest probably to close the bugs for 1st category, the packages from 2nd category should be orphaned and the packages from 3rd category should not be monitored anymore. Any thoughts? I would k

Re: Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

Dne 2.9.2015 v 14:52 Christopher Meng napsal(a): > ovaldi maintainer here. Will update it as soon as possible. > > Last time when I tried the update, it's incompatible with rpm 4.12+... > This was just random choice out of several other packages, but thank you :) Vít -- devel mailing list devel

Re: Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

ovaldi maintainer here. Will update it as soon as possible. Last time when I tried the update, it's incompatible with rpm 4.12+... -- Yours sincerely, Christopher Meng http://awk.io -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedo

Cleanup of Upstream Relase Monitoring bugs

Hi all, Today, I stumbled upon OPEN bugs [1] link on Upstream Release Monitoring wiki page [2]. And the BZ/packages probably deserves cleanup. There are several categories I identified as worrying: 1) Packages are retired but the bugs are kept open. For example: xorg-x11-drv-{mouse,sisusb, ...}

F-23 Branched report: 20150902 changes

Compose started at Wed Sep 2 07:15:04 UTC 2015 Broken deps for armhfp -- [ScientificPython] ScientificPython-2.8-20.fc22.armv7hl requires libmpi.so.1 [apache-scout] apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.jud

rawhide report: 20150902 changes

Compose started at Wed Sep 2 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

Re: Copr for FeedReader

Dne 1.9.2015 v 22:00 janlukasgern...@freenet.de napsal(a): > I was advised to ask on this list for help regarding setting up a copr > repository. > I just released verion 1.2 of my application "FeedReader": > http://jangernert.github.io/feedreader/ > "FeedReader is a modern desktop application des

Re: Copr for FeedReader

Dne 1.9.2015 v 22:00 janlukasgern...@freenet.de napsal(a): > > Hi, > > I was advised to ask on this list for help regarding setting up a copr > repository. Why Copr and not Fedora official package? Is there something which conflicts with Fedora's Packaging Guidelines [1]? Otherwise I can't see Cop

Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL)

Le 29/08/2015 23:27, Adam Williamson a écrit : > Hi, folks. So I've been maintaining ownCloud for the last little > while. Unfortunately I sat down today to try again and update the > package to the latest upstream (8.1.1), and somewhere in the second > hour of insanely stupid PHP autoloader code,