python-pika license change (MPLv1.1 or GPLv2 -> BSD)

2016-02-06 Thread Neal Gompa
To whom it may concern, The license of python-pika has changed in 0.10.0 from MPLv1.1 or GPLv2 to 3 clause BSD. As this is a more permissive licensing structure, there is no expectation of any new licensing conflicts arising from this change. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- dev

Re: Fedora 24 Mass Rebuild

2016-02-06 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 14:03:36 -0700 Nathanael Noblet wrote: > > On Feb 5, 2016, at 11:08 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > > The Mass Rebuild has been completed, 16129 builds have been tagged > > into f24, there s currently 1155 failed builds that need to be > > addressed by the package maintainers

Re: Pidora

2016-02-06 Thread Neal Gompa
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Les Howell wrote: > Hi, guys, > Don't know if this is the place to ask or not, but I wanted to > use Pidora to do some imaging stuff with OpenCV. Turns out many of the > requisite libraries are not in what I have as the latest image, based > on Fedora 20 fr

Re: Fedora 24 Mass Rebuild

2016-02-06 Thread gil
Il 06/02/2016 22:03, Nathanael Noblet ha scritto: On Feb 5, 2016, at 11:08 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: The Mass Rebuild has been completed, 16129 builds have been tagged into f24, there s currently 1155 failed builds that need to be addressed by the package maintainers. FTBFS bugs will be filed

Pidora

2016-02-06 Thread Les Howell
Hi, guys, Don't know if this is the place to ask or not, but I wanted to use Pidora to do some imaging stuff with OpenCV. Turns out many of the requisite libraries are not in what I have as the latest image, based on Fedora 20 from the looks of the version encoded in both the image and the

Re: Attempting to contact unresponsive maintainers - lnovich ooprala and vjancik

2016-02-06 Thread Ondřej Vašík
Kevin Fenzi píše v Čt 04. 02. 2016 v 13:34 -0700: > Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses > for these package maintainers are no longer valid.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 t

Re: Fedora 24 Mass Rebuild

2016-02-06 Thread Nathanael Noblet
> On Feb 5, 2016, at 11:08 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > The Mass Rebuild has been completed, 16129 builds have been tagged into f24, > there s currently 1155 failed builds that need to be addressed by the package > maintainers. FTBFS bugs will be filed shortly. Awesome! Two questions. #1) I

Fedora Rawhide 20160206 compose check report

2016-02-06 Thread Fedora compose checker
Missing expected images: Cloud disk raw i386 Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64 Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Cloud disk raw x86_64 Kde live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160205 No images in Rawhide 20160205 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 13 of 63 ID: 5016Test: i

Re: Python packages not compliant to Fedora guidelines

2016-02-06 Thread Haïkel
2016-02-06 9:44 GMT+01:00 Germano Massullo : > In past days I filled many review requests for various python libraries, in > order to submit python-netdiff [1] and python-django-netjsongraph [2]. > During this process, I noticed that a lot of python packages are not > compliant to Fedora Guidelines

Python packages not compliant to Fedora guidelines

2016-02-06 Thread Germano Massullo
In past days I filled many review requests for various python libraries, in order to submit python-netdiff [1] and python-django-netjsongraph [2]. During this process, I noticed that a lot of python packages are not compliant to Fedora Guidelines for packaging Python stuff [3]. So you have to deal