Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 15:00 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 19:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 11:30 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > > > Still, with COPR I would need to find a suitable location to put > > > the > > > repo. so perhaps the mock method would

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 19:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 11:30 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > Still, with COPR I would need to find a suitable location to put > > the > > repo. so perhaps the mock method would suit me better. > > COPR *is* a repo. All you need to do is l

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 11:30 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: >  > Still, with COPR I would need to find a suitable location to put the > repo. so perhaps the mock method would suit me better. COPR *is* a repo. All you need to do is log in, create a new COPR repo, and you can upload SRPMs and it will build t

Re: Self Introduction: Randy Barlow

Petr Spacek wrote: > On the other hand I have to ask if the server must be running under root? > Shoudn't it run under a dedicated user, e.g. 'aribackup'? > > In that case filesystem permissions should be root:aribackup 770. Hi Petr! ari-backup is really just a convenient wrapper around rdiff-ba

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 18:46 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 09:49 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > This policy is clearly sensible and necessary, no question about > > that. > > > > But this appears to be an opportunity for improvement as well. > > > > Fortunately the breaka

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 02:37 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >  > > Would it make sense to have a composite update type that targets > > multiple releases, where (a) newer targeted releases must be marked > > stable before older targeted releases and (b) the bugzilla bug is > > closed once all of the tar

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 09:49 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: >  > This policy is clearly sensible and necessary, no question about > that. > > But this appears to be an opportunity for improvement as well. > > Fortunately the breakage looks like it should be straight forward to > resolve but that obviously

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 11:15 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 11:02 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 18:48 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > > > On 10/30/2015 05:36 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:50:48 -0400 > > > > Steve Dickson wrote: > > > >

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 20:27 -0500, Eric Griffith wrote: > Hey all, hate to be a downer but we might have a bug in the installer > > Just installed F23 Workstation via RC10. Encryption with btrfs across > two > drives. Intel graphics (Lenovo t450s if anyone has access to one). > Installed the syste

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > But now I want to submit fc22 and fc23 updates. The only option I'm > aware of is to submit two separate updates in bodhi. In the process, > I have to choose whether to ask bodhi to auto-close the bugzilla bug. > Both options are wrong, unfortunately. I pick the "most

Re: gcc 5.2

Kevin Fenzi wrote: > There was/is an issue with the new gcc never finishing it's builds on > arm. Last I heard the maintainer was trying to duplicate the issue and > add some debugging to track it down. And once again the "ARM as primary arch" "feature" hurts us. :-( Kevin Kofler -- dev

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

I think official respins are a good idea, indeed. But: Kevin Fenzi wrote: > So, in order to do what you are wanting we need (at least) 3 things: > > 1) releng has to make every daily compose a full compose of all > deliverables. We have actually been working toward this, and perhaps [snip] > 2) Q

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

Hey all, hate to be a downer but we might have a bug in the installer Just installed F23 Workstation via RC10. Encryption with btrfs across two drives. Intel graphics (Lenovo t450s if anyone has access to one). Installed the system, rebooted into system. I get met with a black screen and the text

Re: Updates (was Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !)

Michael Catanzaro wrote: > Yeah, that's the clear disadvantage. The service pack approach > sidesteps that problem: everything still goes out, just not so soon, so > everything spends plenty of time in testing. All the bugs still get > fixed, just not as fast. And that's "better" HOW? > (This als

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

Michael Catanzaro wrote: > My recommendation is the opposite of what Kevin would say, though. I'd > like to see a third party responsible for giving final approval on all > updates, charged with reducing the size of the updates pipe dramatically. > Maintainers should not have final say on updates e

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

2015-11-02 21:36 GMT-03:00 Kevin Fenzi : > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:33:45 -0300 > Adrian Soliard wrote: > >> 've a question: >> >> Installing F23 RC10 is the same that wait to the final release? I'm >> planning to install it now, tomorrow I will not have time to download >> and install it. > > yes, r

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:33:45 -0300 Adrian Soliard wrote: > 've a question: > > Installing F23 RC10 is the same that wait to the final release? I'm > planning to install it now, tomorrow I will not have time to download > and install it. yes, rc10 was the exact release candidate that is the final

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

've a question: Installing F23 RC10 is the same that wait to the final release? I'm planning to install it now, tomorrow I will not have time to download and install it. 2015-11-02 19:57 GMT-03:00 Adam Williamson : > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 10:52 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> >> > Perhaps full relea

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:30:41 -0800 >>> Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >>> This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best pr

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:30:41 -0800 >> Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or >>> even a good practice, for pushing updates to more

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:30:41 -0800 > Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > >> This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or >> even a good practice, for pushing updates to more than one Fedora >> version at a time? >> >> Suppose I that

Re: Orphaning JBoss Tools package

On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 03:56:15PM +, Gerard Ryan wrote: > Hi devel list (and cc'ed eclipse-sig list), > > I'm going to orphan the eclipse-jbosstools package in rawhide, as I'm no > longer able to give it the time that it needs. My understanding is that > if nobody takes it, it will be auto-re

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:30:41 -0800 > Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > >> This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or >> even a good practice, for pushing updates to more than one Fedora >> version at a time? >> >> Suppose I that

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:30:41 -0800 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or > even a good practice, for pushing updates to more than one Fedora > version at a time? > > Suppose I that foo-1.0-1 is current in fc22, fc23, and rawhide. I > want t

Re: Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 15:30 -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or > even a good practice, for pushing updates to more than one Fedora > version at a time? > > Suppose I that foo-1.0-1 is current in fc22, fc23, and rawhide.  I > want to

Update pushing and bugzilla workflow

This has been bugging me for a while: what's the best practice, or even a good practice, for pushing updates to more than one Fedora version at a time? Suppose I that foo-1.0-1 is current in fc22, fc23, and rawhide. I want to update them all to foo-1.0-2. Obviously step 1 is to build all three n

Re: Ownership of /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs

On 11/02/2015 11:43 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 11/02/2015 03:23 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: >> On 10/30/2015 12:24 PM, Florian Festi wrote: >>> I moved the directory over in rawhide (rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.8.fc24). It is >>> probably a bit late for F23. Shall I clone the bug for >>> javapackages-too

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 10:52 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >  > > Perhaps full release validation could occur on composes every two > > weeks for branched releases? Or is that still too demanding? > > No idea. I don't want to speak for the QA folks.   So to put it simply and broadly: there's a trade-o

Re: Ownership of /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs

On 11/02/2015 03:23 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On 10/30/2015 12:24 PM, Florian Festi wrote: >> I moved the directory over in rawhide (rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.8.fc24). It is >> probably a bit late for F23. Shall I clone the bug for >> javapackages-tools, rpm-mpi-hooks, supermin-devel to get them adjuste

Re: Ownership of /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs

On 10/30/2015 12:24 PM, Florian Festi wrote: > I moved the directory over in rawhide (rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.8.fc24). It is > probably a bit late for F23. Shall I clone the bug for > javapackages-tools, rpm-mpi-hooks, supermin-devel to get them adjusted > or can you take care of them on your own? I have

Distributions Devroom CFP

FOSDEM 2016 - Distributions Devroom Call for Participation The Distributions devroom will take place 30 & 31 January, 2016 at FOSDEM, in room K.4.201 at Université Libre de Bruxelles, in Brussels, Belgium. As Linux distributions converge on similar tools, the problem space overlapping different

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

I often use mockchain locally to make sure all dependent packages rebuild against the new library. The only watchout is that it will still try the next build even if the main one (the one changing) doesn't build so make sure you check in root.log that it used the new build or you will get a false p

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Petr Hracek wrote: > On 11/02/2015 02:46 PM, Petr Hracek wrote: > > On 11/02/2015 02:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek < > phra...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Hello folks, >> >> I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On 11/02/2015 03:32 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:59 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > >>> Folks, this is not okay. This is not the right way to do things. If >>> you >>> aren't reasonably sure that all the library's consumers can be made >>> to >>> work with the new version

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:59 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > > Folks, this is not okay. This is not the right way to do things. If > > you > > aren't reasonably sure that all the library's consumers can be made > > to > > work with the new version of the library, *don't put the new > > version in > >

Fedora Rawhide 20151102 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud disk raw i386 Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64 Generic boot x86_64 Workstation live x86_64 Workstation live i386 Generic boot i386 Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Cloud disk raw x86_64 Kde live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151101 No images in Ra

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On 11/02/2015 02:46 PM, Petr Hracek wrote: On 11/02/2015 02:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek wrote: Hello folks, I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. ​Great

Build Error: Trigger fired by the same package is already fired???

Hello, The following build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11675563 is failing due to error: line 256: Trigger fired by the same package is already defined in spec file: %triggerun -- nfs-utils < 1:1.3.1-4.0 Here all the trigger (that have been around forever): tri

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

Hello, On 11/02/2015 02:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 11:02 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: >> On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 18:48 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: >>> On 10/30/2015 05:36 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:50:48 -0400 Steve Dickson wrote: > 2) find and r

Re: [HEADS UP] Upcoming soname change for libtirpc

On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 11:02 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 18:48 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > > On 10/30/2015 05:36 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:50:48 -0400 > > > Steve Dickson wrote: > > > > 2) find and rebuild all the dependencies? > > > > > > Should be so

Re: Ownership of /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs

On 11/02/2015 11:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 12:24:35PM +0100, Florian Festi wrote: >> >> >> I moved the directory over in rawhide (rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.8.fc24). It is >> probably a bit late for F23. Shall I clone the bug for >> javapackages-tools, rpm-mpi-hooks, supermin

Re: Ownership of /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 12:24:35PM +0100, Florian Festi wrote: > On 10/16/2015 11:06 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > Various packages now install files into /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs for use when > > building rpms. Currently that directory is owned by: > > > > rpm-build-4.13.0-0.rc1.4.fc23.x86_64 > >

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 12:45:36 -0500 Neal Gompa wrote: ...snip... > ​I'm hopeful we can get to this with Rawhide prior to the branching > point, but can our infrastructure handle it?​ I'm somewhat ignorant > of the capabilities of the Fedora infrastructure... Yes, as I noted we are working on it.

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:28:07 + > Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > On Dom, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Sérgio Basto > > > wrote: > > > > On Sex, 2015-10-30 at 17:47 +0100, Jan Kurik wrot

Re: gcc 5.2

>> Am 02.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Xose Vazquez Perez: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Will it be updated/included in F23? >> > troubles with ARM? >> >> no, dunno why there where builds long ago for F22 which never became >> testable because dependencies >> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?pack

Re: gcc 5.2

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:32:36 +0100 Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 02.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Xose Vazquez Perez: > > Hi, > > > > Will it be updated/included in F23? > > troubles with ARM? > > no, dunno why there where builds long ago for F22 which never became > testable because dependencies > >

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:28:07 + Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Dom, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > On Sex, 2015-10-30 at 17:47 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: > > >> At the third round of Fedora 23 Final Go/No-Go Meetin

[POC-change] Fedora packages point of contact updates

Change in package status over the last 168 hours 5 packages were orphaned eclipse-jbosstools [master] was orphaned by galileo Eclipse plugins that support JBoss and related technology https://admin.fedoraproject.or

Fedora 23 LiveUSB Creator

Hey, in the light of tomorrow's new awesome Fedora release, I have released an updated testing version of LiveUSB Creator. There is a Copr repo [1] and Windows direct download [2] for your convenience. Please feel free to report any issue to me directly or the upstream GitHub page [3]. Pl

Re: On running gui applications as root

On Nov 2, 2015 7:05 AM, "Adam Jackson" wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 14:58 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > > > > Anyone running any X (or wayland) application as root in their desktop > > > session is completely bonkers and deserve

Re: On running gui applications as root

On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 14:58 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > > Anyone running any X (or wayland) application as root in their desktop > > session is completely bonkers and deserves every consequence of their > > poor decision. > > OK, I

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Dne 30.10.2015 v 18:06 Will Woods napsal(a): > On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 15:00 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 29.10.2015 v 13:24 Honza Šilhan napsal(a): >>> You can exclude the conflicting packages to proceed the system >>> -upgrade i.e.: >>> "dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23 --distro-sync

Re: gcc 5.2

Am 02.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Xose Vazquez Perez: Hi, Will it be updated/included in F23? troubles with ARM? no, dunno why there where builds long ago for F22 which never became testable because dependencies https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=40 https://bugzilla.

gcc 5.2

Hi, Will it be updated/included in F23? troubles with ARM? -thanks- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Petr Hracek wrote: > Hello folks, > > I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. > Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. > Official ticket on Fedora infrastructure is here [1]. Thanks to kevin from > Fedora Infrastructure

Re: packaging golang guidelines (like etcd, consul)

On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Jan Chaloupka wrote: > >are there some fedora guidelines for golang apps? > >are there macros and helpers for rpm? > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go This needs help in going from a draft to real guidelines. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Pro

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On 11/02/2015 02:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek >wrote: Hello folks, I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. ​Great! Though it seem

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek wrote: > Hello folks, > > I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. > Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. > > ​Great! Though it seems that developer.fedoraproject.org seems to have a style bug that develope

Re: Self Introduction: Randy Barlow

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Petr Spacek wrote: > > Generally principle of least privileges is okay, so I agree with your > proposal > in general. > > On the other hand I have to ask if the server must be running under root? > Shoudn't it run under a dedicated user, e.g. 'aribackup'? > > In th

Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

Hello folks, I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. Official ticket on Fedora infrastructure is here [1]. Thanks to kevin from Fedora Infrastructure team. And Mairin Duffy for design the portal from scratch De

Re: update rawhide to mercurial 3.6?

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 07:27:40AM -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > I am proposing to update mercurial in rawhide to 3.6 (the current release). > This could cause temporary breakage of tortoisehg and hg-git. Any > objections? Yes, I think this is something that should be avoided, even in rawhide. Ca

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Jonathan Underwood < jonathan.underw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it is to some extent a question of what we are QA'ing for. As > I see it (and I may be in the minority), the QA process is a process > put in place to ensure the *install and live media* function >

Re: Self Introduction: Barry Scott

Hello Barry, On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 12:17 +, Barry Scott wrote: > I am the maintainer for a number of open sources projects: > > PyCXX - C++ interface to python > PySVN - pythonic OO API to Subversion > PySVN Workbench QUI interface to Subversion > MEINC_Installer - all

update rawhide to mercurial 3.6?

I am proposing to update mercurial in rawhide to 3.6 (the current release). This could cause temporary breakage of tortoisehg and hg-git. Any objections? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://f

Self Introduction: Barry Scott

I am the maintainer for a number of open sources projects: PyCXX - C++ interface to python PySVN - pythonic OO API to Subversion PySVN Workbench QUI interface to Subversion MEINC_Installer - allows python code to packaged into exec

Re: libicu upgrade to 56.1 with soname bump in rawhide

Hi, On Friday, 2015-10-23 15:21:30 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote: > I'll upgrade libicu to 56.1 in rawhide, which as usual comes with > a soname bump. I requested a side tag for the builds, David Tardon will > help with rebuilding the dependent packages. Done, side tag builds have been tagged into raw

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On 1 November 2015 at 22:14, Michael Catanzaro wrote: [snip] > On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 20:03 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> IMHO, we should have at most 1 week of strict freeze. If we decide >> that we >> have to slip anyway, then we should pull in ALL updates pending >> stable and >> restart the rel

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

​As I found this discussion interesting and I believe FESCo is the right authority to help with this, I have opened a ticket ​ https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1495 for the FESCo meeting on Wednesday, to discuss it. Regards, Jan On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > >

Re: Naming ANTs

On 2 November 2015 at 09:14, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm working on bringing libraries/tools for neuroscience and neuroimaging > into Fedora[0]. Now I'm packaging ANTs[1] (Advanced Normalization Tools > (ANTs)), but we already have package ants[2] (game). > > How do I proceed with it?

rawhide report: 20151102 changes

Compose started at Mon Nov 2 05:15:03 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0

Naming ANTs

Hi folks, I'm working on bringing libraries/tools for neuroscience and neuroimaging into Fedora[0]. Now I'm packaging ANTs[1] (Advanced Normalization Tools (ANTs)), but we already have package ants[2] (game). How do I proceed with it? I think I can name it ANTs in upper case, but probably it will

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

Am 02.11.2015 um 02:28 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Dom, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Sex, 2015-10-30 at 17:47 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: At the third round of Fedora 23 Final Go/No-Go Meeting, that just ends, has been Fedo

Re: Self Introduction: Randy Barlow

On 1.11.2015 18:54, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 10/07/2015 01:37 PM, Randy Barlow wrote: >> I've filed a request to add a new package called ari-backup: > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269609 > > My package reviewer and I had some questions about whether the > permissions I have se

Orphaned Packages in rawhide (2015-11-02)

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