Need help fixing python3-dlib

2022-09-03 Thread Luya Tshimbalanga
Hello team, As noticed, dlib failed to build with pybind11, which needs a rebuild for Python 3.11[1]. Upstream [1] chose to wait for the official release, but is willing to get a fix to handle this particular issue. Upstream repository is on https://github.com/davisking/dlib and the Fedora v

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Gary Buhrmaster
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 1:06 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Perhaps it would be better (although more noisy) to just mail all > provenpackagers every cycle and ask if anyone would like to leave the > group? One should ask a PP (I am not so honored), but getting an email every cycle (and requiring an aff

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 05:40:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Gadzooks, foiled by the old loophole bypass loophole defense again?! No one expects the... :) > No, seriously, I'm kinda assuming 'positive intent' here. It's not > meant to catch someone trying to 'avoid' the check. More mayb

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Adam Williamson
On Sun, 2022-09-04 at 00:05 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > > > But yeah, looking at that, one 'loophole' is it doesn't check if > > they're actually needing *proven* packager powers - just packager > > powers. If a proven packager is only building packages they have > > explicit commit rights to,

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Gary Buhrmaster
On Sat, Sep 3, 2022 at 10:01 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > Look, I'm getting old, okay? ;) I am highly confident that everyone is getting older (with the possible exception being if your name is Benjamin Button). > But yeah, looking at that, one 'loophole' is it doesn't check if > they're actuall

unannounced soname bump in libbpf

2022-09-03 Thread Kevin Fenzi
Greetings. Seems the latest rawhide build of libbpf bumps soname, breaking a number of dependent packages. ;( https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2057060 According to the rawhide updates policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#_rawhide "When a pro

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Sandro
On 04-09-2022 00:01, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2022-09-03 at 13:04 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 12:24:11PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: So, I have a probably-controversial idea for a follow-up on this. Even after this sweep, we have 141 proven packagers. That's a lo

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Adam Williamson
On Sat, 2022-09-03 at 13:04 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 12:24:11PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > So, I have a probably-controversial idea for a follow-up on this. > > > > Even after this sweep, we have 141 proven packagers. That's a lot of > > people who can build

Re: Users with commit rights in src.fp.o but no more in packager group

2022-09-03 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 02:01:59PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 26/08/22 07:17, David Tardon ha scritto: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 11:04 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > >> On to, 25 elo 2022, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >>> We use the python-maint pseudo-account to be the defau

Re: Updating asio in rawhide (and possibly F37) to 1.24.0

2022-09-03 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 08:51:13AM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: > Given the lack of response, I tried to push the update anyway given the low > risk of breakage due to it being header-only. Unfortunately, it turns out > that my side-tag is gone. Documentation states: > > Side tags are cleaned up

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 12:24:11PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > So, I have a probably-controversial idea for a follow-up on this. > > Even after this sweep, we have 141 proven packagers. That's a lot of > people who can build almost anything in Fedora. > > It should be possible to check whe

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

2022-09-03 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2022-08-18 at 17:28 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I just completed the first run of FESCo's newly approved Inactive > Packager Policy[1]. Packagers that have been identified as inactive > have a ticket in the find-inactive-packagers repo[2]. One week after > the F37 final

Re: How to get a new gilab.com/fedora sub-project?

2022-09-03 Thread Maxwell G via devel
Sep 3, 2022 4:18:19 AM Miro Hrončok : We'd like to move https://gitlab.com/fberat/mass-prebuild/ into the Fedora namespace, ideally under something like: https://gitlab.com/fedora/packager-tools/ What do we need to do? Hi Miro, You have to file an infra ticket. See [1]. It would be nice i

Re: Planning to start unifying native and mingw packages

2022-09-03 Thread Sandro Mani
On 03.09.22 17:10, Richard Shaw wrote: I'm trying to migrate fltk right now and running into an issue: Processing files: fltk-debugsource-1.3.8-4.fc38.x86_64 RPM build warnings: RPM build errors: error: Could not open %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/fltk-1.3.8/debugsourcefiles.list: No suc

Re: Users with commit rights in src.fp.o but no more in packager group

2022-09-03 Thread Mattia Verga via devel
Il 26/08/22 07:17, David Tardon ha scritto: > Hi, > > On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 11:04 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: >> On to, 25 elo 2022, Miro Hrončok wrote: >>> We use the python-maint pseudo-account to be the default Bugzilla >>> assignee for Pythons, e.g. >>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/py

Fedora 37 compose report: 20220903.n.0 changes

2022-09-03 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-37-20220902.n.0 NEW: Fedora-37-20220903.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 13 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

[Test-Announce] Fedora 37 Branched 20220903.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

2022-09-03 Thread rawhide
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 37 Branched 20220903.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: Thunderbird 102 pushed to F36 stable

2022-09-03 Thread Marius Schwarz
Am 03.09.22 um 08:58 schrieb Mattia Verga via devel: clearly happened here (pushed to stable just after 5 hours). I think critpath updates should spend more time in testing, maybe we should increase the critpath min karma to, at least, +5. Judging from past critpath updates for several apps, I

Re: Thunderbird 102 pushed to F36 stable

2022-09-03 Thread Marius Schwarz
Am 02.09.22 um 19:49 schrieb Mattia Verga via devel: Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36. This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with autopush enable and just a karma threshold of

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220903.n.0 changes

2022-09-03 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220902.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220903.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 72 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 3.15 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Packages going to be orphaned (was: Users with commit rights in src.fp.o but no more in packager group)

2022-09-03 Thread Mattia Verga via devel
I've filed a ticket [1] to fedora-infrastructure and @kevin is going to remove commit rights from users which are no longer packagers. There are a few packages which are going to be orphaned after the main admin is removed. Here it is the list: - bumpversion - dia-CMOS - dia-Digital - dia-electri

How to get a new gilab.com/fedora sub-project?

2022-09-03 Thread Miro Hrončok
Hello folks. We'd like to move https://gitlab.com/fberat/mass-prebuild/ into the Fedora namespace, ideally under something like: https://gitlab.com/fedora/packager-tools/ What do we need to do? Thanks, -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

Re: Thunderbird 102 pushed to F36 stable

2022-09-03 Thread Demi Marie Obenour
On 9/3/22 04:42, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: > W dniu 3.09.2022 o 02:56, l...@fedoraproject.org pisze: >>> Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36. >>> >>> This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several >>> addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedor

Re: Thunderbird 102 pushed to F36 stable

2022-09-03 Thread Marcin Juszkiewicz
W dniu 3.09.2022 o 02:56, l...@fedoraproject.org pisze: Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36. This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several addons, yet it has been submitted to a stable Fedora release with autopush enable and just a karma threshold

Re: Thunderbird 102 pushed to F36 stable

2022-09-03 Thread Demi Marie Obenour
On 9/3/22 02:58, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 03/09/22 06:36, Demi Marie Obenour ha scritto: >> On 9/2/22 13:49, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: >>> Here we go again: thunderbird 102 update was submitted to F36. >>> >>> This new version was known to bring incompatible changes to several >>> add