Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Failed openQA tests: 5/63 (x86_64), 2/16 (i386)
ID: 14664 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/14664
ID: 14674 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso base_s
Hi all,
Due to some quicks with the new f24 compose process we were hitting cases
where a new package was pushed stable in f23 and not in f24 and we were
pulling in the f23 build due to inheritance in koji. As a result I have cut
all inheritance between f24 and f23-updates resulting in the f24
On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 5:42:58 PM CDT Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:26:38PM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
> > What is wrong with the schedule ? We have agreed to have mass-rebuild
> > in each schedule and in case the mass-rebuild will not be needed, we
> > will just skip it. Or
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 11:32 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:13:36 -0700,
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> >
>> > So please expect the RC to arrive in the next several hours, if all
>> > goes well, and be ready to
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:26:38PM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
> What is wrong with the schedule ? We have agreed to have mass-rebuild
> in each schedule and in case the mass-rebuild will not be needed, we
> will just skip it. Or are you pointing to something else ?
As I understand Dennis, he is sayin
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:28:36 PM CDT Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:11:24AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > (only built for F23 for some reason) - please do try it out and give
>> > feedback. But we can't do a
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 09:13 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hey folks! Just to keep everyone in the loop, here's what's going on
> with F24 Beta:
>
> we have two outstanding accepted blockers that need fixing before we
> can spin a 'release candidate':
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi
Please join us in #fedora-meeting in about 18 hours (15h UTC Apr. 28).
Please feel free to propose any agenda items here or during the roll
call of the meeting.
Agenda:
* Announce new modularity voting members
* Discuss meeting time
* review metadata proposal from contyk & new cards from sct
*
On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:28:36 PM CDT Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:11:24AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > (only built for F23 for some reason) - please do try it out and give
> > feedback. But we can't do an F24 RC with this issue outstanding,
> > really. We could try
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 20:35 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 04/27/2016 08:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 09:13 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Hey folks! Just to keep everyone in the loop, here's what's going on
> > > with F24 Beta:
> > >
> > > we have two outstanding
On 04/27/2016 02:20 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:18:44AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> From https://github.com/nodejs/LTS#lts_schedule it looks like non-LTS
>> branches
>> are maintained for about 9 months, while LTS releases are maintained for 30
>> months.
>>
>> S
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2016-04-28 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2016-04-28 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2016-04-28 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2016-04-28 1
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Fedora 24 Beta Release Readiness Meeting on 2016-04-28 from 19:00:00 to
21:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meet...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting for the Fedora 24 Beta Release
Readiness Meeti
On 04/27/2016 08:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 09:13 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey folks! Just to keep everyone in the loop, here's what's going on
with F24 Beta:
we have two outstanding accepted blockers that need fixing before we
can spin a 'release candidate':
http
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:11:24AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> (only built for F23 for some reason) - please do try it out and give
> feedback. But we can't do an F24 RC with this issue outstanding,
> really. We could try an extremely dodgy 'it's not really a blocker'
> fudge or some kind of he
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 08:35:57AM +0200, Petr Hracek wrote:
> I guess, developer portal should be only in English.
> Many developer documentation are in English, like Python, Perl, Ruby.
If people are interested in working on it, though, having non-English intro
pages might bring more people into
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:18:44AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> From https://github.com/nodejs/LTS#lts_schedule it looks like non-LTS branches
> are maintained for about 9 months, while LTS releases are maintained for 30
> months.
>
> So you're probably right; going forward we should probabl
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 09:13 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hey folks! Just to keep everyone in the loop, here's what's going on
> with F24 Beta:
>
> we have two outstanding accepted blockers that need fixing before we
> can spin a 'release candidate':
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Fedora 24 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting on 2016-04-28 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meet...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting for this important meeting,
wherein we shall determine t
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 11:32 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:13:36 -0700,
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > So please expect the RC to arrive in the next several hours, if all
> > goes well, and be ready to test :) It won't be super different from the
> > current nightl
FYI, The reason rawhide composes were not sending broken deps reports
to the lists or developers was a bug in fedora-pungi (The script that
calls pungi4 for us).
I tracked down the issue and submitted a PR which Dennis merged, so
hopefully tomorrow it should be back to sending the broken deps
rep
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:13:36 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
So please expect the RC to arrive in the next several hours, if all
goes well, and be ready to test :) It won't be super different from the
current nightly, but we'll at least need to do sanity testing and make
sure we cover the fe
On 04/27/2016 06:03 AM, Helio Chissini de Castro wrote:
> François, can you add me as a peimary point of contact of vtk as well ?
>
> Thanks
I'm the POC for vtk. Add yourself to it if you'd like to help out.
(Francois was the POC for the epel7 branch previously)
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical M
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 09:01 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Dunno a way to do this for Fedora, but Debian code search is probably
> a pretty good approximation:
>
> https://codesearch.debian.net/results/SoupAuthClass/page_0
>
> lazarus, soup-sharp, evolution-data-server, evolution-ews
Hey folks! Just to keep everyone in the loop, here's what's going on
with F24 Beta:
we have two outstanding accepted blockers that need fixing before we
can spin a 'release candidate':
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321330
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259865
a kerne
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 08:57:16AM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> There's a lightly used list called logistics@ that was originally
> intended to allow contributors from multiple teams to have a
> discussion concerning all involved without cross posting.
Huh. Since the list has no description, I
On 27 April 2016 at 10:00, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen John Smoogen
> wrote:
>> On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>>>
>>
>>> I realize this is inopportune, but it's best if we figure out *immediately*
>>>
On 27 April 2016 at 10:15, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 04/27/2016 10:00 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen John Smoogen
>> wrote:
>>> On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>>>
I realize this is inopp
On 04/27/2016 10:00 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen John Smoogen
> wrote:
>> On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>>>
>>
>>> I realize this is inopportune, but it's best if we figure out *immediately*
>>> how
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 12:14 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> I do not know whether there is any way of searching source packages
> and
> their sources for the existence of SoupAuthClass string, even it
> would
> be helpful to check which packages to rebuild "just in case".
Dunno a way to do this for Fed
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>>
>
>> I realize this is inopportune, but it's best if we figure out *immediately*
>> how
>> we're going to handle this.
>>
>>
>> Options:
>> 1
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>>
>
>> I realize this is inopportune, but it's best if we figure out *immediately*
>> how
>> we're going to handle this.
>>
>>
>> Options:
>> 1
On 26 April 2016 at 22:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>
> I realize this is inopportune, but it's best if we figure out *immediately*
> how
> we're going to handle this.
>
>
> Options:
> 1) Downgrade back to 4.x, downgrading or dropping any modules in the
> col
On 04/27/2016 09:25 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>> On 04/27/2016 09:04 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
>>> On 27/04/16 13:59, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>>
Would it be possible to try a nodejs 6.x build of everything in a
side-tag or something? My u
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 04/27/2016 09:04 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
>> On 27/04/16 13:59, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>>> Would it be possible to try a nodejs 6.x build of everything in a
>>> side-tag or something? My understanding (based on the changelog) is
>>> that th
On 04/27/2016 09:10 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Denise Dumas wrote:
>>> Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
>>
>> Maybe?
>>
>> Having nodejs in an SCL (or eventually module) would certainly help
>> with versioning
On 04/27/2016 09:04 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 27/04/16 13:59, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
>> Would it be possible to try a nodejs 6.x build of everything in a
>> side-tag or something? My understanding (based on the changelog) is
>> that things should generally work, as while the ABI broke, most of the
>
On 27/04/16 13:59, Neal Gompa wrote:
Would it be possible to try a nodejs 6.x build of everything in a
side-tag or something? My understanding (based on the changelog) is
that things should generally work, as while the ABI broke, most of the
API remained the same.
The actual set of packages th
On 04/27/2016 09:07 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
As for Option 1)? I think someone with more knowledge of the individual
modules
in Fedora (Tom Hughes? Jared Smith?) would need to figure out how many
modules
would be broken if we downgraded. If it's sufficiently small, I sup
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Denise Dumas wrote:
>> Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
>
> Maybe?
>
> Having nodejs in an SCL (or eventually module) would certainly help
> with versioning issues going forward. However, given Fedora has
Versi
On 04/27/2016 08:59 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Denise Dumas wrote:
>>> Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
>>
>> Maybe?
>>
>> Having nodejs in an SCL (or eventually module) would certainly help
>> with versioning issu
>>> As for Option 1)? I think someone with more knowledge of the individual
>>> modules
>>> in Fedora (Tom Hughes? Jared Smith?) would need to figure out how many
>>> modules
>>> would be broken if we downgraded. If it's sufficiently small, I suppose we
>>> could
>>> epoch-bump nodejs and its vi
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Denise Dumas wrote:
>> Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
>
> Maybe?
>
> Having nodejs in an SCL (or eventually module) would certainly help
> with versioning issues going forward. However, given Fedora has
> node
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Denise Dumas wrote:
> Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
Maybe?
Having nodejs in an SCL (or eventually module) would certainly help
with versioning issues going forward. However, given Fedora has
nodejs in the base repository today, Stephen is still left with a har
On 04/27/2016 04:19 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 27/04/16 03:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>> As for Option 1)? I think someone with more knowledge of the individual
>> modules
>> in Fedora (Tom Hughes? Jared Smith?) would need to figure out how many
>> modules
>> would be broken if we downgraded
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 16/58 (x86_64), 6/15 (i386)
ID: 14587 Test: x86_64 Atomic-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/
François, can you add me as a peimary point of contact of vtk as well ?
Thanks
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
domi...@greysector.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 April 2016 at 10:14, Till Hofmann wrote:
> > Hi Dominik,
> >
> > On 04/25/2016 11:03 PM, Dominik 'Ratha
Sounds like a job for rhscl :-)
Denise
> On Apr 26, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>
> Today, Node.js 6.0 was released. This is a significant ABI-breaking release,
> which means there is no guarantee that existing modules will work with it at
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160426.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160427.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 7
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 92
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 32.81 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Thanks very much Ryan. If you don't feel you can maintain
python-netifaces any longer, it's probably best to orphan it, or
transfer ownership to me - I'm happy to take it on.
Cheers,
Jonathan
On 26 April 2016 at 23:00, Ryan Rix wrote:
> Ah yeah, I've been out of touch with Fedora things for quit
On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 12:56 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> For Fedora 24 beta I guess we are self-consistent but after beta
> freeze is done we would need to rebuild everything depending on
> libsoup, right?
Hi,
anything what subclasses from SoupAuthClass reduces the amount. It
include
On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Debarshi Ray wrote:
A heads-up for those owning packages linking against libsoup. It
might be safer to just rebuild all such packages against 2.54.1.
For Fedora 24 beta I guess we are self-consistent but after beta freeze
is done we would need to rebuild everything dependin
A heads-up for those owning packages linking against libsoup. It
might be safer to just rebuild all such packages against 2.54.1.
- Forwarded message from Dan Winship -
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 08:45:54 -0400
From: Dan Winship
To: distributor-l...@gnome.org
Subject: libsoup 2.54.0 accide
On 27/04/16 03:00, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
As for Option 1)? I think someone with more knowledge of the individual modules
in Fedora (Tom Hughes? Jared Smith?) would need to figure out how many modules
would be broken if we downgraded. If it's sufficiently small, I suppose we could
epoch-bump n
Hello,
I want to clarify the situation around "no coredumps in CWD".
If configured ABRT can create a core dump file in the current working directory
(more precisely, ABRT can write a core dump to a file according to the old
value
of /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern) if the process' RLIMIT_CORE (u
On 27 Apr 2016 05:15, "Chris Murphy" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> > OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
>
> >
> > Options:
> > 1) Downgrade back to 4.x, downgrading or dropping any modules in the
collection
> > that don't run on that LTS version.
> > 2) Sti
56 matches
Mail list logo
