On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 07:17:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Richard Fearn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/763
> >
> > You beat me to it :) Thanks for doing that!
> >
> > And Luke seems to have fixed the problem already. Thanks
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 11:33:35AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/01/2015 10:20 AM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >On 02/28/2015 10:42 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>I receive a yellow box telling me: "This update has not yet met the
> >>minimum testing requirements defined in the Package Update Accept
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 10:19:19AM +0100, Tomas Hozza wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> When upgrading F20 to F21 using FedUp, some users had a problem
> with some packages not being upgraded (e.g. [1]). The problem was
> caused by broken update path F20 -> F21.
>
> For example in wget's case I pushed updates
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 07:58:49AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 16:04:07 -0700
> Dave Johansen wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but there are
> > \n's in the messages fro
(Mathieu Bridon)
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1238
https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/388
* Disable karma automatism upon AutoQA test failures (Luke Macken)
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1242
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/36
* Do not trigger the
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 02:11:31PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:09:25PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > As the subject suggests, Fedora 22 will require applications to have a
> > long description to be shown in the software center. We're introducing
> > this change so
> almost immeasurably better, and plead with anyone reading this who has
> > > > the power to bump up the importance of / resources assigned to Bodhi
> > > > 2.0's development to do so.
> > >
> > > So many things at top priority. :) I
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:10:19AM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On 13/10/13 22:43, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >On Sun, 13 Oct 2013 22:35:08 +0100
> >"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> >
> >>Ah, easy when you know where! So it looks like 3 days, although some
> >>have spent a bit longer, eg:
> >>
> >>https:/
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:15:33AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> And, the python stack is a meaningfully-large portion of the minimal
> install. Right now, that's unavoidable because of yum, but in the not-so-far
> future dnf may make it possible to remove that. If we're putting in _more_
> python
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 08:43:11AM +0400, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/control-center-3.8.1.5-1.fc19?_csrf_token=348752c9889bf273010d694694059fece3649eae
> I need bugfix of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=955257
> In stable source FC19 with small patch
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:08:04AM -0500, Karel Klic wrote:
> notmuch -- system for indexing, searching, and tagging email
I'll take this one.
luke
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 11:52:40PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 11:46:49 -0500, Ralph Bean wrote:
>
> > > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
> > > e.g.
> > > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
>
> > I introduced the switch-over as per this ticket
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 05:52:23AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Luke Macken wrote:
> > A new bugfix release of Bodhi has just been deployed to production.
> >
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
> >
> > Bugs and enhancement requests can
message headers (Till Maas)
- Publish messages upon buildroot override tag/untag (Ralph Bean)
- Don't trigger fedmsg notifications for internal bodhi or autoqa comments
Full list of changes
----
Luke Macken (25):
Sync up our specfic with rawhides
Fix an o
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:13:20PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:29:52 -0600,
> Orion Poplawski wrote:
> >On 08/13/2012 11:51 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> >>
> >>This issue should be resolved. Can you try again?
> >>
> >
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 12:01:15PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I just got:
>
> 500 Internal error
>
> The server encountered an unexpected condition which prevented it from
> fulfilling the request.
>
> Powered by CherryPy 2.3.0
>
> submitting a karma update to an update. It did take somet
ince 0.8.7
Kalpa Welivitigoda (1):
fixed input box alignment issue in login box #579
Luke Macken (25):
Convert our tags_url to a byte string before passing it to urlgrabber.
Add a script to detect when older builds become the 'latest' in stable
FESCo recently made an adjustment to the updates policy to no longer require
proventester karma for a critical path update to be deemed as stable.
Critical path updates will now require just one regular +1 karma vote during
the pre-beta phase and two regular +1 karma votes in other phases to be pu
Hi!
A new bugfix release of bodhi has just hit production.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
Changes
---
- A new URL structure implemented, based on discussions from fedora devel
list[0]. Testing & stable updates will now have the following URLs:
/updates//
Bodhi only
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 07:17:10PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 03:04:12PM -0700, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > Or perhaps even:
> > >
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 03:04:12PM -0700, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Or perhaps even:
> >
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA--N/package1-1.1.fc16,package2-1.1.fc16
> >
> > where anything after the FEDORA--N do
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 02:59:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 17:18 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> > bodhi v0.8.3
> >
> >
> > Yesterday I pushed out a new bugfix release of bodhi into production. The
> > bodhi-client is current
bodhi v0.8.3
Yesterday I pushed out a new bugfix release of bodhi into production. The
bodhi-client is currently on it's way to updates-testing for all releases.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
I raced to get this out before the infrastructure freeze today, and since the
Excerpts from Kevin Fenzi's message of Mon Jun 13 12:49:43 -0400 2011:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:43:42 -0500
> Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>
> > I'm working on pushing my first bugfix to F15 (#711261), using the
> > guides I found in the wiki[1][2]. For a non-critical-path package,
> > the Update Pol
Excerpts from Stephen Gallagher's message of Mon Jun 13 13:02:29 -0400 2011:
> This is a great feature. Is there a guide somewhere on how to use it?
>
> If not, can you point me at the relevant upstream documentation and I'll
> write up an SOP for doing this.
This is the closest thing to a guide
Excerpts from José Matos's message of Mon Jun 13 03:26:03 -0400 2011:
> On Monday 13 June 2011 08:09:48 Honza Horak wrote:
> > I think bodhi behaves correctly, but this auto-generated message is a
> > failure, while according https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy a
> > non critical packag
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
Frontend Web/Client Changes
---
* Buildroot Override Management
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bodhi/BuildRootOverrides
* Make update notes mandatory (fesco#457)
* Gracefully handle invalid update template values (#5
Excerpts from Neal Becker's message of Fri May 20 07:40:41 -0400 2011:
> 3083146 build (dist-f14-updates-candidate,
> /uncrustify:6a8dd0eea2183240177154f27c10a730f20994eb) completed successfully
> Creating a new update for uncrustify-0.58-1.fc14
> ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/update
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:00:52PM -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
[...]
> Two bugs were found in Bodhi's tag handling logic and we're hoping for
> fixes in the next day or so. Once those fixes are in and we've verified
> that the tests are pulling in packages correctly, we'll re-enable
> AutoQA's Bodhi co
I just pushed a new release of bodhi into production.
http://bodhi.fedoraproject.org
It's a minor release that contains a small number of fixes, including:
Backend bug fixes
- Don't try and remove the -pending koji tags when resuming a push
- Don't fetch security bug deta
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 02:02:48PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 16:54 -0500, Luke Macken wrote:
>
> > Yep, that happens. There are also people that add +0 comments to
> > updates saying "Untested". There is an obvious need for more
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:49:07PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 12/01/2010 04:40 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 10:41:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:23 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> >>
> >>> That being
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 10:41:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:23 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> > That being said, F14 went out with a broken mdadm *purely* because of
> > this policy.
>
> > Evidently my update was approved somewhere along the way, but because of
> >
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:36:18PM +, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2010-11-29, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > Proven testers do get copies of these emails (dozens of them) and its
> > also summarised in the updates-testing report for all to see.
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:46:36AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 14:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > It's absolutely crystal clear to me that we don't have enough tester
> > manpower to make the current policy workable; it's past time to stop
> > denying that. I'd suggest n
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 09:35:49AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:16:41 -0400
> "Clyde E. Kunkel" wrote:
>
> > On 10/31/2010 03:18 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > Okay, feedback time.
> > >
> > > Lately, there have been several attempts at urging proventesters
> > > (and not
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:10:16AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:19:06 -0400 (EDT), Luke wrote:
>
> > A new version of bodhi has just hit production. This release contains a
> > number
> > of bugfixes and enhancements.
> >
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/update
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 02:19:06PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> Backend Changes
> ===
>
> - Add the new 'dist-fN-updates{-testing,}-pending' tags to builds so AutoQA
> can
> start testing them before they get pushed
> - List security & critpath tes
A new version of bodhi has just hit production. This release contains a number
of bugfixes and enhancements.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
Web UI Changes
==
- Improved editing functionality
- Only unpush edited updates when builds are altered
- Make a note in t
global baserelease 13
> +%global baserelease 14
> %global fedora_build %{baserelease}
>
> # base_sublevel is the kernel version we're starting with and patching
> @@ -663,6 +663,8 @@ Patch1824: drm-intel-next.patch
> Patch1825: drm-intel-make-lvds-work.patch
>
On 08/14/2010 07:17 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 07:07:44PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
>
>> I just pushed out a fix that should allow you to edit updates with your
>> local development instance.
>
> Thank you very much, it works. Patches for the autokarma j
On 08/13/2010 10:16 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 05:57:28PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
>
>> - Show 7 days worth of entries in our RSS feeds, as opposed to 20
>> entries (https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/339)
>
> This is nice, I forgot to add mys
On 08/12/2010 07:47 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
>>- Minimum time-in-testing requirements
>>- When someone tries to push an update to stable, bodhi will
>> look to see if it has the appropriat
On 08/13/2010 01:57 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 08/13/2010 01:23 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
>> On 08/12/2010 07:12 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
>>>> - Minimum time-in-testing requirements
>>>>
On 08/13/2010 11:29 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 01:27:18AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>> "fix" breaks that. Plus, edits can also be only to the description or bug
>> references, Bodhi doesn't allow me to edit those without editing the whole
>> update.
>
> Bodhi also allows you
On 08/13/2010 07:20 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:57:28 -0400, Luke wrote:
>
>> A new version of bodhi has just hit production. This release contains
>> a number of bugfixes and improvements, along with some important process
>> changes.
>
>> - Minimum time-in-testin
On 08/12/2010 07:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Now without any further testing the package can be pushed to stable,
>> which contradicts the purpose of this whole change in bodhi.
>
> Sssh, why can't you keep quiet about this?!
>
>> I think, for packages that are modified dur
On 08/12/2010 07:12 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
>>- Minimum time-in-testing requirements
>>- Every day bodhi will look for updates that have been
>> in testing for N days (fedora: N=7,
A new version of bodhi has just hit production. This release contains
a number of bugfixes and improvements, along with some important process
changes.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
ChangeLog
=
- Package update acceptance criteria compliance
https://fedoraproject
- "Till Maas" wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 02:55:05PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > workflow, or merely an RFE I need to file against Bodhi?
>
> The RFE is already there:
> https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/343
Implemented. It'll hit production shortly.
luke
--
devel mailing
On 07/13/2010 04:59 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 03:55:46PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
>> This patch looks good at a first glance -- it's pretty much exactly what
>> I was planning to do. The only tweak that is needed is to ensure that
>> anonymous
On 07/06/2010 12:15 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:55:27 +0200
> Till Maas wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:33:04PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:48:43PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>>
I have updated the page.
Does it look clear now? Re
On 07/06/2010 04:09 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 03:06:37PM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> IMHO it should not be a +1
On 07/03/2010 06:50 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> Also Bodhi does not allow to fix updates by other people than the update
> submitter afaik.
Anyone with commit privs to the rawhide branch of a package should be
able to submit/edit updates for that package. Yes, it's not ideal, but
that is how it is c
On 07/01/2010 03:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:38:03 -0400
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> I see that libtiff.fc13 and libpng.fc13 are now showing "critical path
>> approved", for which I thank those who did the work.
>
> Thanks. ;)
>
>> I remain a bit
>> unclear about a couple of th
On 07/01/2010 12:47 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> There is a slight wrinkle in that right now, the bodhi code will
>> automatically request a push of an item that reaches this karma threshold,
>> and I don't believe there is a way yet to force it to wait for even
>> greater amou
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 18:37 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> proventesters & strict critical path update handling
>
>
> Critical path package[0] updates now require positive karma from two
> proventesters[1], and a single +1 from
On 06/29/2010 06:37 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
> You can get a list of critical path updates using the bodhi web interface:
>
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/critpath?release=F13untested=True
Oops, broken link. Sorry about that.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/critpat
Hi,
I just pushed a version 0.7.5 of bodhi into production. This release
contains the following notable changes:
proventesters & strict critical path update handling
Critical path package[0] updates now require positive karma from two
proven
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:50 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I talked to notting &c about this earlier, and we've hit this situation
> before. The 'scenario' is simply that there's really no screening
> between 'submit' and 'push' for stable updates, and this one was
> submitted to stable before any
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 09:10 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 06/09/2010 08:54 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 08:38 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> Luke Macken wrote:
> >>> By "success" I mean that I felt we were successful in draf
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 09:35 +0200, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> On 06/08/2010 10:51 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
> > I recently wrote some code to generate detailed statistics of Fedora& EPEL
> > updates within bodhi. Eventually this will be auto-generated and exposed
> > wit
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 08:38 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Luke Macken wrote:
> > By "success" I mean that I felt we were successful in drafting,
> > implementing, deploying, and utilizing the mentioned policies as
> > expected, and the results show increased
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:20 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 16:51 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
>
> >
> &
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 16:51 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
>
> Fedora 13
>
>
> * 231 updates automatically pushed due
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:46 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Luke Macken wrote:
> > This report definitely conveys the shortcomings in our testing, however,
> > it does show us improving with each release.
By 'shortcomings in our testing', I mean, 'shortcomings in the
I recently wrote some code to generate detailed statistics of Fedora & EPEL
updates within bodhi. Eventually this will be auto-generated and exposed within
bodhi itself, but for now here are the initial metrics.
This report definitely conveys the shortcomings in our testing, however, it
does sh
On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 17:19 -0500, BJ Dierkes wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Is anyone else experiencing these issues?
>
> $ bodhi -n --type bug mysql-mmm-2.2.1-1.fc12 --username derks
> Creating a new update for mysql-mmm-2.2.1-1.fc12
> ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 200, Err
On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 01:46:53PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 16:19 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>
> > > From what I can tell, it looks like the -90 update got 'auto-pushed' by
> > > hitting +3 karma, despite the fact that two people had reported the
> > > regression in Bo
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 01:54:10PM -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Things that are known:
>
> * maxamillion's firefox search plugin currently doesn't work. We're looking
> at changing pkgdb search parameters so that it can work again.
> * some non-pkgdb code is broken by the update. These shou
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:47:44PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Friday 19 March 2010, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> > ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/barrage/Fedora/
> > 13, 500, Unknown HTTP Server Response)
> >
> > This is while creating an update.
>
> I got that earlier to
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 01:48:42PM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 12:26 -0500, Luke Macken wrote:
>
> > I think a much better solution would be to require similar critical path
> > policies, across *all* releases, not just pending ones, while still
> &g
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco
> meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions
> regarding whether updates in stable releases should be expected to
> provide features
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 09:29:51PM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 15:36 -0500, Luke Macken wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:40:42PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Luke Macken writes:
> > > > A large number of updates currently suffer from duplic
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:40:42PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Luke Macken writes:
> > A large number of updates currently suffer from duplicate IDs, and I
> > need to figure out a clever way to fix it.
>
> Would it be prudent to not push new updates until you've fixed it
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 01:42:29AM +0100, Christian Krause wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> On 02/18/2010 10:08 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 03:57:58PM -0500, Josh Kayse wrote:
> >> On 02/18/2010 02:35 PM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 03:57:58PM -0500, Josh Kayse wrote:
> On 02/18/2010 02:35 PM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I just logged into the bodhi web interface and clicked on "my
> >updates". In the list I see a recent package I pushed to testing -
> >shorewall-4.4.6-2.fc12. When I click o
77 matches
Mail list logo
