Summary/Minutes from last FESCo Meeting (2018-03-23)

=== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2018-03-23) === Meeting started by tyll at 15:00:34 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2018-03-23/fesco.2018-03-23-15.00.log.html Meeting summary --

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On 03/23/2018 10:11 PM, Christopher wrote: >> > Thanks. That clarifies things significantly. "Docs could definitely be > better" is a severe understatement :) > > FWIW, I found the-new-hotness code at > https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness > I was going to try to do a pull request to im

Avoiding Jargon: dist-git

Can we stop saying "dist-git" in our docs? Nobody knows what that is. The service at https://src.fedoraproject.org is clearly branded as "Fedora Package Sources". Using the jargon "dist-git" in our documentation is simply confusing, since it doesn't match what the service calls itself, and doesn't

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 19:15 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 03/23/2018 05:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 16:30 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > poppler was updated from 0.62.0-2 to 0.63.0-1 in Rawhide on 2018-03-23. > > > This update bumped the soname from libpoppler.so.7

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 12:44 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 03/23/2018 08:27 PM, Christopher wrote: > > I received the following message about a new version of a package, but > I'm > > unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* > > interested in bugs being filed (or at least..

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 12:20 AM Scott Talbert wrote: > On Sat, 24 Mar 2018, Christopher wrote: > > > I received the following message about a new version of a package, but > I'm > > unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* > interested > > in bugs being filed (or at leas

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On 03/23/2018 08:27 PM, Christopher wrote: > I received the following message about a new version of a package, but I'm > unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* > interested in bugs being filed (or at least... interested in trying it out). > > It also references pkgdb, b

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On Sat, 24 Mar 2018, Christopher wrote: I received the following message about a new version of a package, but I'm unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* interested in bugs being filed (or at least... interested in trying it out). It also references pkgdb, but pkgdb i

How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

I received the following message about a new version of a package, but I'm unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* interested in bugs being filed (or at least... interested in trying it out). It also references pkgdb, but pkgdb is no longer available. Also, why is this c

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

On 03/23/2018 07:36 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 24 March 2018 at 00:24, Adam Williamson wrote: > [..] >> >> Update - the person who did the bump did rebuild several dependencies, >> but importantly not texlive-base or gdal. We are running those now. > > BTW In situations like this is possible

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

On 24 March 2018 at 00:24, Adam Williamson wrote: [..] > > Update - the person who did the bump did rebuild several dependencies, > but importantly not texlive-base or gdal. We are running those now. BTW In situations like this is possible to observe how really bad idea was building ALL Fedora +5

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

On 03/23/2018 05:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 16:30 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: >> poppler was updated from 0.62.0-2 to 0.63.0-1 in Rawhide on 2018-03-23. >> This update bumped the soname from libpoppler.so.73 to libpoppler.so.74. >> This soname bump was not announced, as

Re: Latest updates-testing for F27

Wow! That's what I call a fast turnaround. Before even reading the replies, the bug was fixed! :-) -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Latest updates-testing for F27

On 03/23/2018 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 03/23/2018 04:17 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: >> Does anyone know why latest dnf repodata for updates-testing in F27 appears >> to be missing some packages that were supposed to be pushed? For instance, >> kernel 4.15.12-301 is there, but latest dnsmasq

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 16:30 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > poppler was updated from 0.62.0-2 to 0.63.0-1 in Rawhide on 2018-03-23. > This update bumped the soname from libpoppler.so.73 to libpoppler.so.74. > This soname bump was not announced, as it is supposed to be. > > poppler has many depende

Re: Latest updates-testing for F27

On 03/23/2018 04:17 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Does anyone know why latest dnf repodata for updates-testing in F27 appears > to be missing some packages that were supposed to be pushed? For instance, > kernel 4.15.12-301 is there, but latest dnsmasq is not and they were > supposedly pushed at th

Re: Failure on both OpenImageIO and opencv

On 2018-03-23 04:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 16:12 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: >> Hello team, >> >> It looks like both OpenImageIO and opencv failed again as I was unable >> to build LuxRender which depends on them. > The problem isn't in either of those, it's this: >

Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): poppler (libpoppler.so.73 -> libpoppler.so.74)

poppler was updated from 0.62.0-2 to 0.63.0-1 in Rawhide on 2018-03-23. This update bumped the soname from libpoppler.so.73 to libpoppler.so.74. This soname bump was not announced, as it is supposed to be. poppler has many dependencies. This is the list dtardon posted last time he correctly announ

Re: Failure on both OpenImageIO and opencv

On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 16:12 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > Hello team, > > It looks like both OpenImageIO and opencv failed again as I was unable > to build LuxRender which depends on them. The problem isn't in either of those, it's this: DEBUG util.py:439:- package opencv-core-3.4.1-2.fc

Latest updates-testing for F27

Does anyone know why latest dnf repodata for updates-testing in F27 appears to be missing some packages that were supposed to be pushed? For instance, kernel 4.15.12-301 is there, but latest dnsmasq is not and they were supposedly pushed at the same time. I noticed a similar pattern the day bef

Failure on both OpenImageIO and opencv

Hello team, It looks like both OpenImageIO and opencv failed again as I was unable to build LuxRender which depends on them. Could someone investigate the issue? Thanks. Ref: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25908143 -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic & Web Designer E: l...@fedor

Fedora Rawhide-20180323.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 14/137 (x86_64), 5/23 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 210660 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/210660 ID: 210668 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check URL: https://openqa.f

license change in rust-tokio-{executor,reactor,threadpool}

These three rust crates have changed from a combo "MIT or ASL 2.0" license to just MIT. rust-tokio-executor-0.1.1-1.fc29 rust-tokio-reactor-0.1.1-1.fc29 rust-tokio-threadpool-0.1.1-1.fc29 The same change will be coming to rust-tokio-0.1.4 in this update: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:57:19 -0400, you wrote: >On 03/23/2018 07:23 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: >> In case no one steps up, we'd like to start dropping Python 2 support >> from dependent packages *now*, starting with ported libraries on whose >> python2 version nothing in Fedora depends. (We keep a l

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180323.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20180322.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20180323.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:12 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 13 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 127 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 24.20 MiB Size of dropped packages

notificati...@fedoraproject.org

Hi, I have a suggestion. After some confusions that I have made related with notifications with a big delay . Please add the date of notification on the notification . Thanks, -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora 28-20180323.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 11/137 (x86_64), 5/23 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 210432 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/210432 ID: 210468 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check URL: https://openqa.fed

Re: Request for testing: dbus-broker as system and user bus

On 03/23/2018 04:24 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > Thanks for testing! > > We attempted to keep the logging to a minimum, in particular we try to only > log in case of a potential problem. > > The main log message is terse, but we include a lot of metadata (and we are > open to adding

Fedora 28 compose report: 20180323.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-28-20180322.n.0 NEW: Fedora-28-20180323.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:8 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 07:23 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: > In case no one steps up, we'd like to start dropping Python 2 support > from dependent packages *now*, starting with ported libraries on whose > python2 version nothing in Fedora depends. (We keep a list of those at > [1].) I'm +1 to the idea of dropp

Re: Announcing DNF 3 development

On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 10:55 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > On 03/22/2018 07:40 AM, Daniel Mach wrote: > > We are pleased to announce that development of DNF 3 has started. This > > version is focused on performance improvements, new API and > > consolidating the whole software management stack. > >

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 23.3.2018 15:16, Jerry James wrote: And please don't start dropping python 2 subpackages that are actually used by other packages in Fedora without talking to the maintainers first. I just got bitten by this change to python-nose-cov: * Thu Mar 22 2018 John Dulaney - 1.6-13 - Drop python2 s

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 11:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Face it, your plan is naive and has failed even before it begun. This is not useful feedback, and is hostile. Please use only constructive criticism in the future. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedo

[Test-Announce] Fedora 28 Branched 20180323.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 28 Branched 20180323.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: Announcing DNF 3 development

On 03/22/2018 07:40 AM, Daniel Mach wrote: We are pleased to announce that development of DNF 3 has started. This version is focused on performance improvements, new API and consolidating the whole software management stack. Please read more details on our blog: https://rpm-software-management

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 12:23 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now. Bummer - I am speechless. Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer m

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote: > Just a note of warning: don’t to be too over-eager with dropping > everything Python 2 related in EPEL-7. Its EOS is only sometime > after 2024 > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Product_life_cycle) > and the question whet

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 2018-03-23, 11:23 GMT, Petr Viktorin wrote: > Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of > January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer > maintenance. Just a note of warning: don’t to be too over-eager with dropping everything Python 2 related in EPEL-7. Its EOS is only

Re: Request for testing: dbus-broker as system and user bus

Hi Kevin, Thanks for testing! On Fri, Mar 23, 2018, 1:00 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > So everything seems to be working fine for me with it, but I did notice > that the logs are... quite a bit more terse. > > Here's the 4 messages I have so far: > > Mar 22 16:46:20 taim.scrye.com systemd[1]: Startin

Intent to orphan Python 2

tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now. Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer maintenance. Fedora still has more than 3000 packages depending on pyt

Self Introduction: Pavel Hrdina

Hello everyone, My name is Pavel Hrdina. I live in Brno and I work for Red Hat for several years. I mostly work on libvirt and virt-manager projects and I have some experience with maintaining downstream packages. My first package submission is D-Bus binding for libvirt.

Re: josm orphaned

Dne 22.3.2018 v 19:08 Ricardo Martinelli Oliveira napsal(a): > I never packaged something for Fedora before, but can you give me a > chance to see how is the effort to maintain the package before I adopt > it? This should be good place to start your journey: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_

Re: josm orphaned, or why are we packaging

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 01:49:27PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > 1. ELF binaries > 2. binary run-time loadable libraries > 3. script files for scripting language environments (java programs >could be arguably placed here) > 4. scripting language libraries > 5. java applets running in the b

Fedora-Atomic 27-20180323.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap