[Test-Announce][Test Days] Tuned 2024-09-09

Hello All, We're excited to invite testers to participate in the testing of the new *Tuned Power Daemon* in Fedora 41, which will soon become the default power profile daemon. This new feature aims to improve power management by offering more efficient power-saving profiles and enhanced customizat

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)

On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 6:57 AM Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 3:21 AM Huzaifa Sidhpurwala > wrote: > > > > I can grant you co-maintainership of both these pkgs if you want. > > That would be much appreciated, thank you. My FAS name is

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)

Hello, On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 3:21 AM Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote: > > I can grant you co-maintainership of both these pkgs if you want. That would be much appreciated, thank you. My FAS name is alexpl. Best regards, A. -- ___ devel mailing list -- de

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)

Hi. On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 3:47 AM Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I have just opened a non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas > (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)[1]. > > Does anyone have a way of reaching Huzaifa other than his redhat.com > address? > > I am ar

Non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)

Hello, I have just opened a non-responsive maintainer check for huzaifas (Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala)[1]. Does anyone have a way of reaching Huzaifa other than his redhat.com address? He does not appear to have any recent package-related activity and it's been a while since he showed up here. He's a

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240908.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240906.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240908.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 11 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 141 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 9.51 MiB Size of dropped packages:0

Re: Attempting to coordinate a lasem, goffice, gnumeric, abiword and gnome-chemistry-utils update for F41 and rawhide

Hello Gwyn, It took me a while to iron out the kinks, but I think I made it. I've tested everything in mock locally before doing anything in dist-git. I have some doubts about building goffice and gnumeric on ix86, but if that fails, I can revert to the previous ExcludeArch state. I've opened PRs

Re: [SPDX] packages that are "not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX"

On 06. 09. 24 10:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote: churchyard pypy pypy3.10 pypy3.9 python3.13 Huh? pypy uses a license that is valid old license identifier not listed in Fedora-license-data. But python3.13? Is it because the license is macronized? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Mat

2024-09-09 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 41 Blocker Review Meeting

# F10 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2024-09-09 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: https://matrix.to/#/#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=chat.fedoraproject.org Hi folks! It's time for a Fedora 41 blocker review meeting! We have 1 proposed blocker and 10 proposed freeze exceptio

Re: [SPDX] packages that are "not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX"

Dne 08. 09. 24 v 3:54 odp. Barry napsal(a): $ LC_ALL=C rpmspec -q --qf '%{license}\n' ruby.spec error: ruby.spec: line 241: failed to load macro file /home/msuchy/rpmbuild/SOURCES/macros.ruby I have hit rslated issues like this in the past, rpmspec needs the rpm macro dependencies to be instal

Re: [SPDX] packages that are "not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX"

> On 8 Sep 2024, at 09:47, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > It fails for others packages: > > $ LC_ALL=C rpmspec -q --qf '%{license}\n' ruby.spec > error: ruby.spec: line 241: failed to load macro file > /home/msuchy/rpmbuild/SOURCES/macros.ruby I have hit rslated issues like this in the past, rpms

Fedora 41 compose report: 20240908.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-41-20240907.n.0 NEW: Fedora-41-20240908.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 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: Non-responsive maintainer check for fab (Fabian Affolter)

I have not had much luck contacting fab over the past year or more when getting Mailman dependencies branched for EPEL 9; they tend to end up requiring release engineering to intervene per the Stalled EPEL Request process. Best regards, Michel On September 4, 2024 5:48:22 PM EDT, Fabio Alessan

MGWIN88VIP register, free credit 500.

MGWIN88VIP register, free credit 500. MGWIN88VIP - Number 1 direct-to-play web slots center. Website : https://mgwin88.site -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fe

Re: [SPDX] packages that are "not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX"

Dne 06. 09. 24 v 12:16 odp. Petr Pisar napsal(a): $ rpmspec -q --qf '%{license}\n' perl-License-Syntax.spec GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl This is not as easy as I thought. While this works for simply packages using %shrink: $ rpmspec -q --qf '%{license}\n' rpm-specs/python-graph-tool.