Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

On 12/3/18 6:53 PM, Leigh Scott wrote: >> On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: >> >> Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. +1000 >> >> Is there a definitive reason why those are necessary to go in RPM fusion? >> Was >> Tom Hughes right? >> >> Dusty > > This su

Re: python-xpyb

On 12/3/18 6:12 PM, Joseph D. Wagner wrote: There appears to be a python2 version of this package, but not a python3 version. If you're looking for a python3 option, I see python3-xcffib which claims to be a replacement for xpyb. ___ devel mailing l

Re: python-xpyb

On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:12 -0800, Joseph D. Wagner wrote: > There appears to be a python2 version of this package, but not a > python3 > version. > > Should there be? Seems last release is from 2012 [1] also is a FTBFS in F29 [1] https://xcb.freedesktop.org/dist/ xpyb-1.3.tar.gz 2012-03-22

python-xpyb

There appears to be a python2 version of this package, but not a python3 version. Should there be? Joseph D. Wagner ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

> On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: > > Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. +1000 The packages should be in the repo by the weekend. https://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=581 https://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=582

Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 3:56 PM Leigh Scott wrote: > > On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: > > > > Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. > +1000 > > > > Is there a definitive reason why those are necessary to go in RPM > fusion? Was > > Tom Hughes right? > > > >

Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

> On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: > > Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. +1000 > > Is there a definitive reason why those are necessary to go in RPM fusion? Was > Tom Hughes right? > > Dusty This sums up the situation http://gnome-apps.13852.n7.nabble

Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

On 12/3/18 1:42 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5089 https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5090 Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. +1000 Is there a definitive reason why tho

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 22:03:57 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 09:05:58PM +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 13:50:58 -0700, stan wrote: > > > Isn't this kind of thing a question for legal? Is there any liability > > > for fedora that arises from

Re: Bugzilla outage/upgrade delayed until 9 December 2018

On 1/12/18 01:45, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 10:14 AM Ben Cotton wrote: >> >> The upgrade of bugzilla.redhat.com has been delayed a week. It will >> now be done on 9 December 2018 from 0:00 to 12:00 UTC. >> > > Aww, anyone know why? The release pipe line was unexpectedly frozen,

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-03)

= #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2018-12-03) = Meeting started by contyk at 15:00:02 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2018-12-03/fesco.2018-12-03-15.00.log.html . Meeting summ

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 09:05:58PM +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 13:50:58 -0700, stan wrote: > > Isn't this kind of thing a question for legal? Is there any liability > > for fedora that arises from using encumbered software from FOSS? I've > > seen other people refer to runnin

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity Office Hours

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity Office Hours on 2018-12-04 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-modular...@chat.freenode.net The meeting will be about: This is where you ask the Fedora Modularity Team questions (and we try to answer them)! Join us on

Re: Any plans to support .heic files in Fedora?

On 11/30/18 5:20 AM, Leigh Scott wrote: > Reviewers welcome. > > https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5089 > https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5090 Thanks Leigh. I see those have already made progress in code review. +1000 Is there a definitive reason why those are neces

Re: Proposal: Faster composes by eliminating deltarpms and using zchunked rpms instead

On 16/11/18 22:07 +, Jonathan Dieter wrote: > The core idea behind zchunk is that a file is split into independently > compressed chunks and the checksum of each compressed chunk is stored > in the zchunk header. When downloading a new version of the file, you > download the zchunk header firs

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 13:50:58 -0700, stan wrote: > Isn't this kind of thing a question for legal? Is there any liability > for fedora that arises from using encumbered software from FOSS? I've > seen other people refer to running things by legal on this list. I'm > not sure how to do it, though.

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 07:39:31PM +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 12:56:37 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Christian Glombek wrote: > > > > > This is an interesting question and I would like to back the idea of > > > making this available on COPR. > > > My 2 cents: > > > The package

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, 3 Dec 2018 19:39:31 + Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 12:56:37 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Christian Glombek wrote: > > > > > This is an interesting question and I would like to back the idea > > > of making this available on COPR. > > > My 2 cents: > > > The package *it

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 12:56:37 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Christian Glombek wrote: > > > This is an interesting question and I would like to back the idea of > > making this available on COPR. > > My 2 cents: > > The package *itself* complies to COPR's licensing guidelines, making it > > eligible f

Re: Proposal : Use OSBS to build the fedora container base image

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:39 PM Clement Verna wrote: > > Hi all, > > I would like to get feedbacks on the following proposal. Use OSBS to > build the fedora container base image, indeed OSBS has the capability > to build a base container image using a kickstart file. > To do this OSBS needs a Docke

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

Christian Glombek wrote: > This is an interesting question and I would like to back the idea of > making this available on COPR. > My 2 cents: > The package *itself* complies to COPR's licensing guidelines, making it > eligible for distribution via that service, while the runtime dependency > of M

Proposal : Use OSBS to build the fedora container base image

Hi all, I would like to get feedbacks on the following proposal. Use OSBS to build the fedora container base image, indeed OSBS has the capability to build a base container image using a kickstart file. To do this OSBS needs a Dockerfile, a kickstart file and an image-build.conf file stored in dis

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

This is an interesting question and I would like to back the idea of making this available on COPR. My 2 cents: The package *itself* complies to COPR's licensing guidelines, making it eligible for distribution via that service, while the runtime dependency of MatLAB makes it an uneligible candidate

Agenda for Tuesday's Modularity Working Group Meeting (2018-12-03)

Find below a list of topics which are planned to be discussed in the Fedora Modularity Working Group meeting on Tuesday at 15:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-3 on irc.freenode.net. To find out when this is in your local time zone, check the Fedora Calendar (if you've set it and are logged in): https:/

Fedora Rawhide-20181203.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 14/131 (x86_64), 3/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20181202.n.0): ID: 315298 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_free_space URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/315298 ID: 315314 Test: x86_64

Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks)

Dne 01. 12. 18 v 23:17 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski napsal(a): > On Friday, 30 November 2018 at 14:15, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> 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 shou

Re: [HEADS UP] Rawhide buildroot now has glibc-minimal-langpack instead

On 2018-11-28, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > the removal of glibc-all-langpacks from the buildroot[0] is done. > Standard buildroot has decreased from 445 to 237 megabytes in > installed size ;) > That's nice, but Koji builders have not been reconfigured away from LANG=en_US.UTF-8 and that means that all

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 12:41:41 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Ankur Sinha wrote: > > Since correctness is really important here, if upstream does not test > > the toolboxes against Octave, we shouldn't either > > I think that if it runs at all, we should ship it. > > Some upstreams seem pretty conse

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20181203.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20181202.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20181203.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 18 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

[Bug 1655574] New: Upgrade perl-Text-VimColor to 0.29

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655574 Bug ID: 1655574 Summary: Upgrade perl-Text-VimColor to 0.29 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Text-VimColor Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: jples...@r

Orphaning jabberd

I just orphaned jabberd on all branches as I just stopped my last instance of jabberd and upstream seems to have stopped development. Adrian ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le.

Re: Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-03)

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:43:33AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Any idea why > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnuPG2_as_default_GPG_implementation > still doesn't have FESCo ticket? It's been a week since it was sent to ML. Nope but I wanted to put it on the agenda anyway but apparently f

Re: Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-03)

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:43:33AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Any idea why > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnuPG2_as_default_GPG_implementation > still doesn't have FESCo ticket? It's been a week since it was sent to ML. It's a week today, but FPM is based in US, and it's currently eit

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

Ankur Sinha wrote: > Since correctness is really important here, if upstream does not test > the toolboxes against Octave, we shouldn't either I think that if it runs at all, we should ship it. Some upstreams seem pretty conservative. E.g., SPM seems to have done a lot of work on Octave compatibi

Re: Packaging FOSS that requires MATLab at runtime

Hello, On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 00:44:15 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > The rule in Fedora is: If you want this to be in Fedora, this has to be > packaged for Octave with a Requires: octave, even if upstream does not > support it. Software in Fedora cannot depend on software that is not part of

Re: Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-03)

Any idea why https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnuPG2_as_default_GPG_implementation still doesn't have FESCo ticket? It's been a week since it was sent to ML. On Mon, Dec 3, 2018, 10:40 Petr Šabata Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the > FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00U

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity WG (weekly)

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity WG (weekly) on 2018-12-04 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Meeting of the Modularity Working Group. More information available at: [Modularity Working Group wiki

Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-03)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2018-12-03 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: python-os-client-config (was Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks))

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:25 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Dne 03. 12. 18 v 10:17 Alfredo Moralejo Alonso napsal(a): > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:03 AM Miro Hrončok > > wrote: > > > > Dne 03. 12. 18 v 3:51 Tristan Cacqueray napsal(a): > > > > > > On

Re: python-os-client-config (was Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks))

Dne 03. 12. 18 v 10:17 Alfredo Moralejo Alonso napsal(a): On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:03 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote: Dne 03. 12. 18 v 3:51 Tristan Cacqueray napsal(a): > > On November 30, 2018 1:15 pm, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> The following packages are

Re: python-os-client-config (was Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks))

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:03 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Dne 03. 12. 18 v 3:51 Tristan Cacqueray napsal(a): > > > > On November 30, 2018 1:15 pm, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they > >> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If

Re: python-os-client-config (was Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks))

Dne 03. 12. 18 v 3:51 Tristan Cacqueray napsal(a): On November 30, 2018 1:15 pm, Miro Hrončok wrote: 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 no