Re: Please don't commit significant changes and leave them to be built by the mass rebuild

build as draft build and when the PR is merged, promote the draft build to a real one (in a side tag if needed). -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproje

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

On 29. 07. 25 6:36, Maxwell G wrote: Hi, On 7/28/25 2:52 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: golang-* packages excluded via https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3447 Looking at the list of packages from last week's notification, I see the following packages are considered fesco_3447_not_exempt in

Re: Please don't commit significant changes and leave them to be built by the mass rebuild

t end up witch bunch of broken runtime deps after all the rebuilds. Builds in mass rebuild don't "see each other" so each rebuild is somewhat isolated and should be able to pass individual bodhi/gating. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fed

Re: Please don't commit significant changes and leave them to be built by the mass rebuild

On 28. 07. 25 20:46, Adam Williamson wrote: Mass rebuild changes bypass automated testing and gating This begs the question: Should we stop doing it that way? What if we let all the builds from mass rebuild go trough bodhi? One by one. Would Bodhi + OpenQA handle the load? -- Miro Hrončok

Non-responsive maintainer check for ellert

://bugzilla.redhat.com/2384168 Mattias, I hope you are doing fine. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le

List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 43 approximately one week before branching, i.e. 2025-08-05. 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the fourth one. Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco

Re: Virtual provides and/or conflicts for alternate sets of packages

On 23. 07. 25 13:48, Jan Stanek wrote: On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:45 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: I'd go with alternative-for(nodejs-bin). There's even code in dnf that will tell you the options if you try to install nodejs-bin (unless the metapackage is called that). You can try it out

Re: Virtual provides and/or conflicts for alternate sets of packages

, python36, python38, python39 [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/blob/5.2.15.0/libdnf5/base/transaction.cpp#L294 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: Best Emacs for Fedora editions?

ivers-0:25.0.7-3.fc41.x86_64 mesa-libEGL-0:25.0.7-3.fc41.x86_64 qt5-qtwayland-0:5.15.17-1.fc41.x86_64 qt6-qtwayland-0:6.8.3-1.fc41.x86_64 spice-gtk3-0:0.42-5.fc41.x86_64 webkit2gtk4.1-0:2.48.3-1.fc41.x86_64 weston-0:14.0.1-2.fc41.x86_64 weston-libs-0:14.0.1-2.fc41.x86_64 -- Miro Hrončok --

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

On 21. 07. 25 0:03, Miro Hrončok wrote: Depending on: mingw-wine-gecko (9) wine (maintained by: besser82, mooninite)     wine-10.12-3.fc43.i686 requires mingw32-wine-gecko, wine-mono     wine-10.12-3.fc43.x86_64 requires mingw32-wine-gecko, mingw64-wine- gecko, wine-mono

List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 43 approximately one week before branching, i.e. 2025-08-05. 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the third one. Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/

Re: Fedora Virtualization Maintainers account disabled in Bugzilla

On 15. 07. 25 12:00, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:48:50AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, There is a bug for qemu which was assigned to "Fedora Virtualization Maintainers" in Bugzilla by default: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2375004 But that account i

Fedora Virtualization Maintainers account disabled in Bugzilla

isabled. """ How do we reach the maintainers of qemu in Bugzilla? And, more generally, should we detect this and treat it similarly to "maintainer has an invalid Bugzilla email set in FAS" problem? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- __

Re: flowblade problem using pyproject_* macros

It is necessary to use %pyproject_buildrequires from the folder where the Python package has its pyproject.toml and/or setup.py file: %generate_buildrequires cd flowblade-trunk %pyproject_buildrequires -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- __

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

eant then the guideline should say so. OK, could you please submit a pull request? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

--- The reason for the rule is that: 1) Not all RPM packages that need BR on python3-devel are "Python packages" to use %pyproject_* macros. 2) Packages that use the pyproject declarative BuildSystem to reduce boilerplate use %pyproject_buildrequires implicitly and gain a BR on python3-

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

On 03. 07. 25 21:03, Miro Hrončok wrote: flatpak-rpm-macros   amigadave, otaylor, tpopela, yselkowitz This package has a noutobuild file without a documented justification (in the file or in the commit message that added it). I see it was now built in Rawhide. Until now

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

On 04. 07. 25 13:50, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 04. 07. 25 v 13:16 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): On 04. 07. 25 13:13, Vít Ondruch wrote: What my email was about are points 7 and 8 of the policy. This might be some Google deduplication, but I can't say I would receive remainder as per: "

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

nstead, I would noticed. This was the first reminder. You clearly received it because you are replying to it. I don't understand what's confusing here. My email says: > 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the first one -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +42077797

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

On 04. 07. 25 11:27, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 03. 07. 25 v 21:03 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): rubygem-abrt vondruch I wonder why I see rubygem-abrt listed here, but the relevant ticket, such as [1] is not updated. Updated how? My email is orthogonal to bugzilla

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

, music) teem-1.11.0-81.fc43.src requires levmar-devel = 2.6-18.fc42 Took this one. Co-maintainers welcome. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: Preview of declarative Maven builds available in rawhide

n at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/plexus-cipher/blob/rawhide/f/plexus-cipher.spec Oh. I did not know we can have multiple BuildOptions in one spec. That's neat. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailin

Re: Fedora 43 Python 3.14 mass rebuild status [DONE]

ge against its all fine building dependencies. For cases where everything is actually fine, we'll handle the builds. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: Fedora 43 Python 3.14 mass rebuild status [DONE]

ybody time with opening/closing tickets and then manually rebuilding all the packages just to see that everything is fine. What do you mean by "everything is fine"? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ de

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

y makes a difference in these context. Adding such pyproject.toml has no benefit. It's more or less the same as not having it (except the default backend in that case is setuptools.build_meta:__legacy__, but I don't think it's any different). -- Miro Hrončok --

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

ead of the removed 2 is indeed enough, yes. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Condu

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

l use python setup.py install, they will beak when setuptools removes that. We will not be removing the deprecated macros before then, so defining your own macros has no point. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

On 09. 06. 25 9:17, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 08/06/2025 21:10, Miro Hrončok wrote: For projects with setup.py, the macros fallback to setuptools backend and pyproject.toml is not required. What happens when Python removes setup.py support from setuptools? That is not what is

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

On 09. 06. 25 9:23, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 08/06/2025 22:06, Miro Hrončok wrote: See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qr-code-generator/pull-request/2 instead. Thank you. But this is a temporary solution until Python removes setup.py support from setuptools, right

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

On 08. 06. 25 21:10, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 08. 06. 25 9:51, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 07/06/2025 14:49, Aoife Moloney wrote: The modern pyproject.toml-based build system and corresponding `%pyproject` macros should be used instead, which provide a more flexible and standardized

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

the corresponding subpackages. Why? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct

Re: Fedora 43 Python 3.14 rebuild in a side tag starts today

r changes in Python packages until the rebuild is over. Thanks! Karolina -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to dev

Re: Copr patch syntax compat

that is too new (e.g. uses new RPM rawhide-only features) or too old (e.g. uses old RPM EL-only features). I created https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/issues/1315 5 years ago -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok

Re: is gone from rawhide

On 05. 05. 25 10:30, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 25. 04. 25 17:42, Florian Weimer wrote: With the update to glibc-2.41.9000-11.fc43, is no longer there, and some historic terminal-related baggage is no longer included in .  These terminal interfaces were alread obsolete when Linux was first

Re: is gone from rawhide

a7/Modules/termios.c:1137:17: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct termio’ 1137 | {"TCSETAW", TCSETAW}, | ^~~ make: *** [Makefile:3589: Modules/termios.o] Error 1 =====

Re: Taking over the mirrormanager2 package

/mirrormanager2-flask-xml-rpc.patch -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https

Re: AutoResponse: You can't ask Kalev Lember because that account is disabled.

t one. You can proceed with the needinfo now. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of

Re: Un-deprecate Aspell

: https://github.com/GNUAspell/aspell Is there a way to un-deprecate a deprecated package? You need to make a new Change proposal for it. I don't think that should be required. If you maintain the package, drop the deprecated() provides. If you don't, talk to the maintainer. -- Mi

PSA: I won't retire 11 Fedora 42 fails to install packages today

fix built but not added to bodhi and the rest are orphaned for a while and will eventually be gone from the distribution anyway. Hence, I decided to skip this step. If you see a package that's better removed immediately, let me know. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora M

Re: %pyproject_buildrequires -t/-e and %tox without a suitable tox configuration will error

On 13. 03. 25 19:39, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 06:55:57PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 13. 03. 25 18:50, Milan Crha wrote: On Wed, 2025-03-12 at 00:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok via devel-announce wrote: This change will land to rawhide first and later to all stable releases as

Re: %pyproject_buildrequires -t/-e and %tox without a suitable tox configuration will error

On 13. 03. 25 18:50, Milan Crha wrote: On Wed, 2025-03-12 at 00:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok via devel-announce wrote: This change will land to rawhide first and later to all stable releases as well. Hi, are you really going to intentionally break all the stable releases? I thought there is

%pyproject_buildrequires -t/-e and %tox without a suitable tox configuration will error

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pyproject-rpm-macros/pull-request/512 On 05. 02. 25 10:47, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello Pythonistas. When we updated tox from version 3 to 4, it no longer fails when here is no suitable tox configuration found. This was a deliberate upstream choice. Unfortunately, it means that pac

Re: Possible to use 'fedpkg mockbuild' with a side tag?

docs/pull-request/177 Thanks. There's also my RFE to make this shorter: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/1295 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F41 to F42

f43 spot [BLOCKED] $ koji list-pkgs --show-blocked --tag f42 --quiet --package torque torque f42 spot [BLOCKED] -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

On 21. 02. 25 12:41, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello. With the recent discussions about provenpackagers in Fedora, I recently got an idea. One of the common needs for provenpackagers is to simply "bump and rebuild" a set of dependen

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

ovenpackager, I would not usually think of that situation when bump-builidng stuff. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le..

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

On 20. 02. 25 14:08, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Miro Hrončok <mailto:mhron...@redhat.com>> wrote: What if we allowed all packagers to push empty commit to any package? That should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager access. We w

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

On 20. 02. 25 14:02, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 7:59 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 02. 25 13:51, Michael J Gruber wrote: With the wide adoption of %autorelease, such bump commits are empty, which should be easy to verify. Wide, well, ... Roughly 39% based on a simple grep

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

On 20. 02. 25 13:51, Michael J Gruber wrote: With the wide adoption of %autorelease, such bump commits are empty, which should be easy to verify. Wide, well, ... Roughly 39% based on a simple grep for %\{?autorelease -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

On 20. 02. 25 13:28, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 01:17:02PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: What if we allowed all packagers to push empty commit to any package? That should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager access. We would also communicate in our policies that such

Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

commit to any package? That should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager access. We would also communicate in our policies that such bumps do not require prior agreement with the maintainers to avoid confusion about "what are we allowed to do". -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777

Re: Guidelines for packaging icons for other themes?

-theme 2) or co-own /usr/share/icons/HighContrast(/scalable(/apps)) -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le

Re: Need help with "cannot open display" error when %pyproject_check_import is run

un somehow. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2025-02-11)

On 11. 02. 25 18:40, Jednorozec wrote: = # #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco = Meeting started by @humaton:fedora.im at 2025-02-11 17:00:25 Coudl you please share the log links? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800

Re: Applying code layout optimization to postgresql16 RPMs in Fedora 41 gave a 3%-6% improvement in IPC

python3.14 specfile: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3.14/c/7fc2da03e52a52e09d2ca4aa52f2748f88e55ff7?branch=rawhide -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To u

Re: WRT "Add explicit BR: libxcrypt-devel"

On 03. 02. 25 12:13, Miro Hrončok wrote: Why only for Python < 3.13? I guess because the crypt module was removed from Python 3.13 and python3-libs no longer Requires libcrypt.so.2()(64bit) + libcrypt.so.2(XCRYPT_2.0)(64bit). -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhron

WRT "Add explicit BR: libxcrypt-devel"

s not explain why. Why was this necessary? Why only for Python < 3.13? Why there was no communication with us about the thing? Please do not build the packages, I will use this opportunity to pin tk-devel to < 9. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedo

Re: Applying code layout optimization to postgresql16 RPMs in Fedora 41 gave a 3%-6% improvement in IPC

On 01. 02. 25 2:10, William Cohen wrote: On 12/5/24 9:45 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 04. 12. 24 20:32, William Cohen wrote: On 11/21/24 17:32, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 21. 11. 24 23:11, William Cohen wrote: Sediment has been designed to work with the RPM build process. Currently, one needs to

Re: Inadvertent mass-rebuild triggered soname bump in libnfs

As an example of a big chnage, I think the SPDX commits were pushed but not built. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@

Re: glibc issues: undefined symbol: _ZGVbN4v_cosf

652> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2341839 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora C

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired next week

On 24. 01. 25 6:13, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: On 1/23/25 03:30, Miro Hrončok wrote: qm-dsp    tartina qm-vamp-plugins   valtri https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qm-dsp/pull-request/3 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qm-vamp-plugins/pull-request/2 (Those two should be

List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired next week

Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 42 approximately one week before branching, i.e. 2025-01-28. 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the last one. Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/F

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

#x27;t see each other" hence the order of the builds within is completely irrelevant. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an em

Re: Retiring python-nose from Fedora 43+

On 16. 01. 25 13:29, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 06. 01. 25 12:45, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, I propose we retire python-nose from Fedora 43+ immediately after branching. The package has been deprecated for 5 years:    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose It does not build with

Re: Retiring python-nose from Fedora 43+

On 06. 01. 25 12:45, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, I propose we retire python-nose from Fedora 43+ immediately after branching. The package has been deprecated for 5 years:   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose It does not build with Python 3.14:   https

Re: nothing provides group(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64

On 16. 01. 25 9:47, Petr Pisar wrote: V Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 09:07:49PM +0100, Miro Hrončok napsal(a): I just wasn't sure if the user/group Provides aren't "magical" in some sort -- e.g. dnf on F42+ treating them specially by creating the user/group, DNF does not create

Re: nothing provides group(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64

creating the user/group, but I guess the respective Provides must actually exist. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists

nothing provides group(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64

- nothing provides group(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64 - nothing provides user(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: GCC 15 for Fedora 42 in a side-tag

it happens, please? I know you actually do test this in copr, so why do you land it just like that? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email

Re: rpmlint+readelf corrupted interpreter on generated binaries

hould do. https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/issues/1147 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-59cc5ecf54 Pending (lack of) user feedback, I plan to update rpmlint in Fedora 41 as well, after a while. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok

List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in 2 weeks

Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 42 approximately one week before branching, i.e. 2025-01-28. 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the fourth one. Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco

Re: Fedora eln compose report: 20250112.n.0 changes

On 12. 01. 25 4:59, Fedora ELN Report wrote: Added packages: 267 Hi. What happened here? I cannot find the newly added packages in the content resolver. Are those packages from ELN Extras? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok

Re: Retiring python-nose from Fedora 43+

retirement directly or indirectly. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https

Re: Non-responsive maintainer ngompa

several weeks, IMHO 2 weeks is not sufficient time to wait before going for the non-responsive maintainer process. A simple comment on the PR requesting a response is probably a better first step. Except it rarely works with Neal unless you ping him via a side channel :( -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Tcl/Tk 9.0 (system-wide)

the main Python in Fedora 42, see https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/127364 I would not bother with the older ones. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Retiring python-nose from Fedora 43+

es enblend, hugin-base -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in January

. How long do we need to keep it? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct

Re: [Rust] Orphaning some CLI tools (written in Rust)

lta Hey Fabio. Thanks for maintaining this until now, I use it :) Do you know nay alternative in case this goes out of the distro? I probably don't have free cycles to maintain the Rust bindings for libgit2 :/ -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fed

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in January

On 23. 12. 24 10:21, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 22. 12. 24 v 17:18 Miro Hrončok via devel-announce napsal(a): colm filiperosset, jtaylor Chm, can some package be this unlucky? https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/colm https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/colm? last_seen_ts

Re: Promoting co-maintainer to main maintainer for orphaned packages?

On 18. 12. 24 12:53, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 18. 12. 24 v 10:53 dop. Miro Hrončok napsal(a): When the package is orphaned (e.g. because the buzgilla that said it does not install was ignored by all 8 maintainers), it would be assigned to one of them, we are at 7 maintainers. It would take 8

Re: Promoting co-maintainer to main maintainer for orphaned packages?

tainers. If a package is orphaned for FTBFS/FTI reason, co-maiantainers clearly should not get it automatically. If the original main admin orphans it, they should communicate with their co-maintainers. In reallity, they don't always do that, but that is an exception. -- Miro Hrončok --

Re: Revocation of provenpackager access from pbrobinson

like that. Sure, I guess we all agree that the line is fuzzy and probably not very well documented/defined. That does not mean we use that to justify problematic provenpackager behavior. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___

Re: Revocation of provenpackager access from pbrobinson

despite my opinion on the matter.) [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2284439#c1 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email

Re: NumPy 2.x

expect that some modules will need time to support NumPy 2. """ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2332408 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscr

Re: Future and future home of the %{version_no_tilde} macro

nly usable like this: %{version_no_tilde %{quote:}} And that is a bit hard to use. There's also: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/pull-request/101 https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219 https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2715

Re: Applying code layout optimization to postgresql16 RPMs in Fedora 41 gave a 3%-6% improvement in IPC

On 04. 12. 24 20:32, William Cohen wrote: On 11/21/24 17:32, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 21. 11. 24 23:11, William Cohen wrote: Sediment has been designed to work with the RPM build process. Currently, one needs to use modified RPM macros.  These can be created quickly by writing the output of the

Re: Tcl/Tk 9.0.0 rebase

On 05. 12. 24 11:57, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 10:30 PM Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 6:14 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 04. 11. 24 17:26, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: I am going to add compat Tcl/Tk 8.6 packages, because IMHO porting of the packages to Tcl

Re: Extended Nominations Period for FESCo - Closes Thursday December 5th

On 03. 12. 24 19:43, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: If we receive enough candidates to hold an election for FESCo, voting will start on Friday 6th December, as per the elections schedule[3]. What about the interviews? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok

Re: subscription-manager orphaned

tually takes care of this package. Wouldn't it be better to let the co-maintainers take the package instead of jumping the gun and taking it "for now"? They had ~6 weeks to do it. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___

Re: Proposed qemu-srpm-macros

On 29. 11. 24 15:47, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 03:36:44PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 28. 11. 24 23:49, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 4:30 AM Florian Weimer wrote: * Richard W. M. Jones: One question is whether it's better to add this as a sub-pa

Re: small problem with vendored deps in rust packages

ld avoid the pitfall of someone at a later time defining bundled_rust_deps to 0 and things not working right in that case? Something like, %bcond bundled_rust_deps %{defined rhel} %autosetup %{?with_bundled_rust_deps:-a1} Yes please. It's e

Re: Proposed qemu-srpm-macros

h /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.valgrind-srpm. Please don't. I don't want it there. It makes things complicated when redhat-rpm-config gets changed/backported incompatibly in RHEL. In what way? We have other such macros there. I'd not expect this to be problematic and your answer

Re: protobuf: too old and too new, how to move forward?

ff as is the case now). It would be good to have a discussion here followed by a plan to resolve this issue. If that means doing two protobuf versions, I'm willing to help with that as well. Yes, having multiple packages with different versions is usually the way to go. See e.g. python-pytest7

Re: Retiring schroedinger

On 22. 11. 24 13:15, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: This project is dead upstream... Or is it alive? (Apologies, I could not resist.) -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel

Re: Applying code layout optimization to postgresql16 RPMs in Fedora 41 gave a 3%-6% improvement in IPC

posed to put those to ~/.rpmmacros. Exccept I never build Python loclly, I use Koji or mock. I can probably amend this to use %global and insert it to python3.14.spec. But what else I need to do? Do you have a step by step kind of document I can follow? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 F

Re: Removal of long-standing FTBFS packages?

On 11. 11. 24 14:38, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 08. 11. 24 v 21:50 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): On 08. 11. 24 15:44, David Bold wrote: The policy is applied: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/ message/RROZC3KFCF6G4RRMKEM4NXJ4PTFFROTT/ The question is, why

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

-parser gets retired, we can restore usage of the bundled one. It already bundles llhttp anyway. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Removal of long-standing FTBFS packages?

11038 After that, it was never built. As such, it makes no harm. Anyway, Vít, you can follow step 3 at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/#_package_removal_for_long_standing_ftbfs_and_fti_bugs -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora M

Re: Review request for python-durationpy

reviewed. I proposed https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-durationpy/pull-request/1 -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le

Re: Tcl/Tk 9.0.0 rebase

in/wish + manpages) or move them to another conflicting subpackage (e.g. tk8-wish/tk8-doc) Similarly with tcl and tcl8. Happy to review/help. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 Fedora Matrix: mhroncok -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fe

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >