On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:38:28AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:57 +, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> > It cannot be automated, because it relies on using the correct public
> > key, which always has to be checked manually by the packager
> > (including the use of gpg).
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 04:19:49PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> In case of an incident where the private key may be compromized, upstream
> is required to build the trust into the new key from the ground up.
>
> As these cases can be quite complicated and would need some serious actions
> on beha
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 04:31:14PM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 30 March 2016 at 15:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:44:44PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:26:59PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> > > [snip
On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 19:55:54 +0100
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Packagers, members of the fedorabugs group and people having a
> 'watchbugzilla' ACL in pkgdb must have a bugzilla account attached to
> the email they set in the Fedora Account System (FAS).
> This is mandatory to allo
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2016-03-31 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2016-03-31 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2016-03-31 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2016-03-31 1
F24 too I think, doesn't make sense to stay with 4.x there as upstream
projects (e.g. astropy start dropping support for older releases and
everything builds fine @24 too.
Christian
On 03/30/2016 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 19:14 +0200, Sergio Pascual wrote:
>> Hello,
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 19:14 +0200, Sergio Pascual wrote:
> Hello, tomorrow I'm going to update wcslib to 5.14, which includes a soname
> bump. This change affects the following packages:
Just for Rawhide, or F24 also? It's useful to mention this.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC:
Hi,
I'll take care @ kstars. astrometry is not an official package yet, it
is in review.
Greetings,
Christian
On 03/30/2016 07:14 PM, Sergio Pascual wrote:
>
> Hello, tomorrow I'm going to update wcslib to 5.14, which includes a
> soname bump. This change affects the following packages:
>
> c
Hello, tomorrow I'm going to update wcslib to 5.14, which includes a soname
bump. This change affects the following packages:
cpl
kstars
python-astropy
astrometry
Best regards, Sergio
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedora
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Workstation live x86_64
Images in this compose but not 24-20160329.n.1:
Security live x86_64
Security live i386
Jam_kde live x86_64
Docker_base docker
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 15:57 +, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> It cannot be automated, because it relies on using the correct public
> key, which always has to be checked manually by the packager
> (including the use of gpg).
I mean, after the packager manually configures signature checking the
first t
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:26:59PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> [snip the part I complete agree with]
...
> In fact signatures and license files are quite similar:
> our guidelines say that the license file MUST be installed if provided
> by upstream, and packagers SHOULD ask upstream to provide
Michael Catanzaro writes:
> Yeah, if this isn't automated SOMEHOW, I'm not going to do it, because
> I don't understand how to use GPG. I doubt I'm unusual in this
> regard
It cannot be automated, because it relies on using the correct public key,
which always has to be checked manually by th
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:14 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I don't think you can discount this. Most maintainers don't check the
> tarballs they download if they build fine, afaik. Checking the
> signatures in %prep would force a significant change to how we build
> srpms.
Yeah, if th
On 30 March 2016 at 15:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:44:44PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:26:59PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> > [snip the part I complete agree with]
> >
> > > Having said the above, I also advoc
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 12:49 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Failed openQA tests: 60 of 68
anaconda blew up in blivet:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322497
it's being looked into now. Consider this compose as unusable for Rawhide
install. Yesterday's compose mostly worked,
OLD: Fedora-24-20160329.n.1
NEW: Fedora-24-20160330.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added packages: 11
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 90
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.24 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0.00 B
Size of upgraded packages: 385.07 MiB
Size of
> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Talbert [mailto:s...@techie.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 16:29
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> Subject: RE: ddclient orphaned
>
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, John Florian wrote:
>
> >> Somehow, somewhen, I wound up as the main contac
> From: Adam Williamson [mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 19:30
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> Subject: Re: ddclient orphaned
>
> On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 20:10 +, John Florian wrote:
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Adam Will
Hi,
it has been a while since kubernetes was pushed to f23 stable
repository. This is the first suitable build after more than half a year.
Any help with testing and adding positive karmas is appreciated. Update
is located here [1].
[1]
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/kubernetes-1.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:44:44PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:26:59PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
> [snip the part I complete agree with]
>
> > Having said the above, I also advocate a SHOULD instead of a MUST in
> > the guidelines as providing a signatu
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:26:59PM -, Ralf Senderek wrote:
[snip the part I complete agree with]
> Having said the above, I also advocate a SHOULD instead of a MUST in
> the guidelines as providing a signature with the source tarball is
> voluntary for upstream and should be viewed as an addit
James Hogarth wrote:
> We trust our packagers to do a lot, we can trust them to add this to their
> packages if it helps them and for them to encourage it in their reviews if
> they find a signed archive provided upstream.
IMHO, this is the main point. Checking signatures automatically in %prep o
All left-over rebuilds for Rawhide and fc24 have finished yesterday…
The fc24-update [1] carries all needed rebuilds and has reached testing,
waiting for some karma… ;)
[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3353070273
Am 29.03.2016 um 09:16 schrieb Björn Esser:
Already r
On 03/29/2016 03:28 PM, Scott Talbert wrote:
> I adopted it. Working on updating it to the latest release.
>
> Scott
Thank you, Scott! :) I use ddclient fairly regularly and I will be glad to
test your updated package.
--
Major Hayden
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
On 30 Mar 2016 13:15, "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek"
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 07:01:53AM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> > And of course with the packager uploading both the key and the archive
to
> > git with no net access in koji to verify the key I really don't see what
> > this actually
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Workstation live x86_64
No images in this compose but not Rawhide-20160329.n.0
Images in Rawhide-20160329.n.0
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 07:01:53AM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> And of course with the packager uploading both the key and the archive to
> git with no net access in koji to verify the key I really don't see what
> this actually gives us
The signature and key can be verified by anyone. The signat
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160329.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160330.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 102
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 8.06 MiB
Size of dropped packages:419.55 KiB
Size of upgraded packages: 1.09 GiB
29 matches
Mail list logo
