Re: Packit service not submitting builds or updates for branched / F38

only bodhi updates are missing. That was incorrect, f38 dist-git branch needs to be updated as well. Tomas On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 8:23 PM Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 4:48 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> On 02. 03. 23 16:06, Fabio Valentini wrote: >>

Re: Packit service not submitting builds or updates for branched / F38

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 4:48 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 02. 03. 23 16:06, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 3:47 PM Tomas Tomecek > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Fabio, answers inline below. > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 5:50 PM Fabio Val

Re: Packit service not submitting builds or updates for branched / F38

Hi Fabio, answers inline below. On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 5:50 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 5:34 PM Matej Focko wrote: > > - linux-system-roles v1.35.1: submitted to F39, F37, F36, but not F38 > - osbuild-composer v75: submitted to F39, F37, F36, but not F38 > - cockpit-compo

[CANCELLED] Source-git SIG meeting (2022-05-25)

As there are no topics and no attendees, the meeting is cancelled. See you next time! Tomas ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.

Re: Packit automates Koji Builds and Bodhi updates

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 5:54 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 06. 05. 22 17:37, Frantisek Lachman wrote: > > The problem is I have not explicitly opted in yet I am afraid this will > block > my work. Before a more robust solution is found, please at least provide > me a > way how I can temporarily disa

Re: Packit automates Koji Builds and Bodhi updates

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 4:12 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 06. 05. 22 15:50, Frantisek Lachman wrote: > > 1) configurable allow-list / block list for committers (for the user > and/or for > > the whole service) > > * For our projects, we would allow just the `packit` user that we use > for > > submi

Re: Packit automates Koji Builds and Bodhi updates

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 06. 05. 22 11:06, Frantisek Lachman wrote: > > You can also check the activities of the packit FAS user in Koji > > (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/userinfo?userID=4641 > > ) or

Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Source-git SIG

Today's meeting was really brief: * Next sprint plans: * We're finally planning to set up the namespace where the initial repos will live. * We will also start the engineering work on connecting the source-git repos with Fedora dist-git counterparts (we should already have most of the code, so

Re: Copr - look back at 2021

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 3:35 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > >- > >Statistics: >- > > Copr run 2,900,000 builds. > - > > People created 15 731 new projects. > > Whaaat! The whole list of things you have achieved is mega impressive but this one totally caught my eye: doing

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

/main/packit/patches.py [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Git_Hosting_Services On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 3:46 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 02:03:22PM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:40 AM Zbigniew Jędr

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

Randy, thank you for providing such detailed information! A few comments inline. On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 3:01 AM Randy Barlow via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2021-06-29 at 15:36 +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > > On the "uni-repo" counter

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:40 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > Our definition of source-git is: > > * upstream release tarball > > * downstream code changes applied as patches during %prep > > * additional configs for sake of building and testing > > But that describes dist-git *exactly

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 12:48 AM Colin Walters wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021, at 5:16 AM, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Greetings from the Fedora source-git SIG! We are planning to start > > publishing reports of what we are working on so everyone can easily > > pay

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 8:09 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 03:48:54PM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:41 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > > > On 24. 06. 21 11:16, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > > >

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 1:01 PM PGNet Dev wrote: > > On 6/24/21 6:40 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 24. 06. 21 11:16, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > >> ## Choosing git forge to host source-git repositories > >> We need to find a home for all the source-git repositories.

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:41 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 24. 06. 21 11:16, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > ## Choosing git forge to host source-git repositories > > We need to find a home for all the source-git repositories. This is > > actually a really hard task beca

Re: Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 3:39 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > Hi Tomas, > > This is great. Do you mind if I republish this in the Fedora Community > Blog? https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org Go for it, Ben :) My inspiration for the report comes from the Q1 update of the CentOS Hyperscale SIG: https:

Fedora Source-git SIG report #1 (June 2021)

Greetings from the Fedora source-git SIG! We are planning to start publishing reports of what we are working on so everyone can easily pay attention and get involved if interested. If you have any ideas, comments or requests, don’t be shy and let us know :) Here’s a short list of things which we a

Fedora Source-git SIG kicked off successfully!

Happy Friday everyone! We just wanted to give you a brief update that we successfully started the Fedora Source-git SIG [1] yesterday via our first SIG meeting [2]. As this was our first contact, we did mostly introductions, talked about the SIG setup and finally touched a bit on the topic of sou

Re: Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:52 PM Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > On 14.04.21 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git > > > > Our main goal

Re: Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

Daniel, thank you for sharing your experience! More comments inline. On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:26 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:53:06PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 14.04.2021 16:27, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > > Could

Re: Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

comments inline On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:09 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Sou

Re: Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:52 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 14.04.2021 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development > > workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with sources and > > upstream histo

Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with sources and upstream history (this is what we call s

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

What's the progress on this change? Is it going to land in one week? I just want to be sure that our tooling is ready and works with this change since we hardcode "fedora-master" in many places. Thanks! Tomas On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/C

Re: How to easily automate test builds in a COPR project

On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 3:46 PM Till Maas wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 07:58:53AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > 4. Build the packages in COPR. > > > > Easy enough using a bash script but is there a better way? > > packit allows to create test builds in COPR based on GitHub PRs and

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

ou for taking your time, Tomas On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:05 PM Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Let’s talk about dist-git, as a place where we work. For us, > packagers, it’s a well-known place. Yet for newcomers, it may take a > while to learn all the details. Even though we operate with proje

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:31 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > This is a bit of irony: > > ~~~ > > post-upstream-clone: > - curl -O > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3/raw/master/f/python3.spec > - curl -O > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3/raw/master/f/idle3.appdata.xml > - cur

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 7:25 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Hello Tomas, > > I have a fair bit of experience with operating in both so-called > "source-git" and "dist-git" workflows. I've known them by the names of > "merged-source" and "split-source" trees respectively, so forgive me > if I use that ter

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:16 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > >> In what way does keeping the spec file in our fork help us? > > (speechless for like a minute) > > I don't really understand this comment. Speechless because our workflow is > tedious? I just couldn't understand why you are asking me abou

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:04 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 05. 05. 20 12:41, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Before I reply, I'd like to stress that we are still in a prototype > > phase - not everything is solved (clearly) and at this point, we > > experiment with the workf

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:09 PM clime wrote: > > Imho, it would be nice if this could live on src.fp.o in a separate > dedicated namespace for source repos. Agreed, that would be ideal! Tomas ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To u

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:41 PM Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 12:41:06PM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Petr, I should have probably stressed that our target is Fedora (or > > even all Red Hat operating systems). Yes, there are hundreds of > > distribut

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 3:29 PM Ondřej Lysoněk wrote: > This "rebase all PRs" thing seems to be a recurring theme... What is the > reason to ask contributors to rebase? (I mean, are we trying to go back > to the days of centralized version control systems?) > > In my experience, there is rarely a g

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 12:13 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Tomas Tomecek: > > > Florian, a very good point. Yes, we are planning to support GitLab - > > we have a GSoC project for it: > > > https://pagure.io/mentored-projects/issue/69 > > Is a GSoC project rea

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

. Tomas On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 8:56 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 05:05:02PM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Over the years there have been multiple tools created to improve the > > development experience: > > rdopkg [r], rpkg-util [ru], tito [t] and p

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:43 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > > This may not be related enough to discuss here so I'll take it to another > thread if needed, but... > > One thing that really bugs me is there's still a catch-22. When you're > working on a new package there is no "git" to work with. I used

Re: Is dist-git a good place for work?

Florian, a very good point. Yes, we are planning to support GitLab - we have a GSoC project for it: https://pagure.io/mentored-projects/issue/69 On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:07 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Tomas Tomecek: > > > In the packit project, we work in source-git reposito

Is dist-git a good place for work?

Let’s talk about dist-git, as a place where we work. For us, packagers, it’s a well-known place. Yet for newcomers, it may take a while to learn all the details. Even though we operate with projects in a dist-git repository, the layout doesn’t resemble the respective upstream project. There is a m

Re: Packit-as-a-Service case studies and tips

Hi Jun, thanks for reaching out! I'd suggest CCing someone from our team in future to make sure we see your message. It's good though you started the discussion on fedora-devel. On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:54 PM Jun Aruga wrote: > > I am considering using Packit-as-a-Service [1] for an upstream > pr

Re: Let's talk about Fedora in the '20s!

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 1:51 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > For me, an ultimate success would be if upstream projects would actually use > Fedora-family distros in their CI testing. And I don't mean that they would > use > Copr or packit to package RPM packages, or that they deploy their own Jenkins

Packit-as-a-Service is now live!

We are happy to announce the availability of Packit-as-a-Service [1], a GitHub App, which utilizes the Packit project [2]. Using the Packit service in your upstream projects helps you continuously ensure that your projects work in Fedora OS. Just add one config file [3] to your repository, along w

Re: Self Introduction: Gordon Messmer

Hi Gordon and welcome! So nice of you to package Bender. Would anyone be willing to sponsor Gordon? Tomas On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:58 AM Gordon Messmer wrote: > > Hello, > > My name is Gordon Messmer. I've been a long-time user of Red Hat > systems, starting with Red Hat Linux 4.2 in 1997.

Re: Planning on retiring alot and python-urwidtrees

feel free to test the updates out. All of them are python 3 only. Tomas On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:45 PM Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Hi! > > I packaged alot [1] for Fedora a long time ago. Alot is a terminal MUA > built on top of notmuch. I stopped using it a year+ ago (OT: now I&#

Re: How to maintain python-urwid orphaned package

This is still on my backlog, ideally, to also add python2 support and add it to epel7. Miro was so nice and fixed the package in rawhide so it works with python3. Feel free to open pull requests via https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-urwid, all the help is very welcome! Feel free to drop me

planning on taking python-urwid

Hey, this is just a heads-up that I'm planning on taking python-urwid since it's a dep of 2 of my packages. It's orphaned and I want it to find a new home. Rel-eng ticket will follow. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscrib

Planning on retiring alot and python-urwidtrees

Hi! I packaged alot [1] for Fedora a long time ago. Alot is a terminal MUA built on top of notmuch. I stopped using it a year+ ago (OT: now I'm thinking of using neomutt). Given that, I'm planning to retire alot (and also python-urwidtrees which is a direct dep). The main problem here is that al

Packit is released: Packaging as a Service

We are pleased to announce the initial version of Packit. Packit makes it easy to bring and integrate your upstream projects into Fedora, right now we are focused to bring upstream releases into Fedora rawhide. You can use packit now as a command-line tool, soon Packit will run as a hosted service

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

Is the expected workflow to be that I'd put these two lines to my spec file? %generate_buildrequires some-tool generate-rpm-buildreqs %{_builddir} I'm interested if: 1. Generators will be separated from RPM codebase. 2. What the interface b/w a generator and rpm tool will be. 3. What are the expe

Re: Introducing packit

Hi Miro, sorry for a late reply: I wanted to think it through. Comments inline. On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:43 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 20. 02. 19 23:24, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Hello, > > > > at DevConf.cz, we have introduced a new project: packit [1] [2]. > &g

Introducing packit

Hello, at DevConf.cz, we have introduced a new project: packit [1] [2]. I started a Fesco ticket [3] recently to get it approved but the consensus was to start a devel@ thread instead and discuss it here. So... Here we go! TL;DR What's packit? * Packaging automation: get latest bits into Fedora

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

> * Matthew Miller: > > > Make it cheap to maintain branches. I expect that one what to achieve > this would be to build directly out of Git, with synthesized release > numbers and changelogs. This way, you can apply a lot of fixes to > multiple branches without encountering mandatory conflicts

Re: [atomic-devel] Starting a Container SIG

I'm interested. Clement, thanks for setting this up! Tomas On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:10 PM Clement Verna wrote: > Greeting all, > > The container effort in Fedora has until now been looked after by the > Atomic WG, since this Working Group is now going to focus mostly on > Fedora CoreOS, I pr

Re: tools and systemtap containers are available in Fedora

candidate for a debugging container -- tools container could contain sysadmin tools and the debugging container could be used for debugging applications and maybe even C-development. Tomas On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 16:48 +0200, Tomas Tomecek wro

Re: [atomic-devel] tools and systemtap containers are available in Fedora

Thank you for figuring this out! I fixed in dist-git: https://src.fedoraproject.org/container/systemtap/c/a8a59cacb440aacc150fad8a94d264d53a341baf?branch=master Can't build in OSBS, seems like the service is having issues. Tomas On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Jeremy Eder wrote: > Woops, sor

Re: [atomic-devel] tools and systemtap containers are available in Fedora

Not sure if the question is for me -- I literally have no idea how to do that. Let me know how I can help, Tomas On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 09/18/2017 10:48 AM, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Hello, > > > > we managed to move tools contai

tools and systemtap containers are available in Fedora

Hello, we managed to move tools container from Fedora Dockerfiles github repo to Fedora infra [1]. As a side effects, we put systemtap in a dedicated container. We would very much appreciate your feedback here: so if you have some time to take a look at these containers and try them out, it would

Re: modularity: (my) expectations vs. reality

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:16 PM, stan wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 07:51:57 +0200 > Michal Novotny wrote: > > > I guess I am missing something but I don't see how modularity adds > > flexibility. rpm, yum repos, ansible, dnf seem to be quite flexible > > even now and having that + something else

Re: introducing fed-install: easy way to install packages from koji and other releases

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:59 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > First, one thing that would be very handy (but could perhaps just be a > dnf plugin) is to install from koji, but use signed packages (if > available). I'm not sure how hard it would be to implement in your tool, > but you might take a look

introducing fed-install: easy way to install packages from koji and other releases

Hello Fedora, for some time, I am using rawhide as my main system. I always struggled with installation of non-rawhide packages: installing stable kernel, downgrading to a non-broken package, reinstalling package which is no longer available in repositories... I thought that somebody had to write

Re: running MTF tests in taskotron

Quoting Jan Scotka (2017-06-16 17:27:48) > > > It would be awesome if I could execute a command locally which would > > trigger > > testing process inside taskotron. This way I could make sure the tests get > > picked up correctly -- I definitely don't want to do rebuilds just for > > sake of > >

Re: Rust SIG is happy to provide tools written in Rust

Quoting Igor Gnatenko (2017-06-16 12:49:21) > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hello everybody, > > on behalf of Rust SIG[0] I'm happy to announce that recently we > migrated our package builds to COPR repository[1] and would like to ask > you which tool(s) you would like to

running MTF tests in taskotron

Hi guys, I hope you don't mind me posting this to devel. So I built nodejs module today (Friday) [1], went over to taskotron interface to see if tests were executed [2]. Unfortunately, the tests [3] we have present in the module dist-git were not triggered. Why? It would be awesome if I could exe

python-docker is in rawhide (was Re: heads up: update of python-docker-py to 2.x in rawhide)

I just built python-docker in rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=860378 The biggest change is that `python-docker` does NOT provide `python-docker-py`, this means two things: 1. You can't have both packages installed. 2. You can still use `python-docker-py`. 3. You

Re: heads up: update of python-docker-py to 2.x in rawhide

Quoting James Hogarth (2017-02-13 18:02:23) > On 13 February 2017 at 16:40, James Hogarth wrote: > > On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x > >&

heads up: update of python-docker-py to 2.x in rawhide

Hello, am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26 (and hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here

Re: RFC: Round 2 review of Fedora Docker Layered Image Guidelines

Quoting Adam Miller (2016-05-31 19:12:47) > Hello all, > I had previously sent out a RFC email about a month ago asking for > feedback on the Fedora Docker Layered Image Guidelines[0]. > > I was asked by FESCo to start a new thread so that this can be > discussed further on the devel mailing l

Re: F24 Self Contained Change: sen - terminal user interface for docker engine

Quoting Jan Kurik (2015-12-07 16:28:22) > = Proposed Self Contained Change: sen - terminal user interface for > docker engine = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/sen--tui-for-docker > > Change owner(s): > * Tomas Tomecek > > sen enables you to manage yo

Re: [RFC] DistGit Container Image namespacing for Layered Image Build Service

Quoting Adam Miller (2015-11-10 19:08:25) > Cockpit's Dockerfile repo in DistGit would be stored with a > leading special character: > fedpkg clone -cockpit > How about $ fedpkg clone cockpit-docker Pros * no need to change infrastructure * easy to use * repo name suggests co

Re: kernel builds in rawhide

Quoting Josh Boyer (2015-07-27 16:05:26) > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Well, we could have a separate repo with all stable kernels and installing > > the > > kernels as > > > > ``` > > $ dnf update --disablerepo

Re: kernel builds in rawhide

Quoting Peter Robinson (2015-07-27 11:15:58) > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > I can see that RCs of development version of kernel are being built in > > rawhide. > > Which is really great to test new stuff. But I would be pretty scared to

kernel builds in rawhide

I can see that RCs of development version of kernel are being built in rawhide. Which is really great to test new stuff. But I would be pretty scared to run RC kernel normally. Would it make sense then to also build latest stable releases? E.g. now it would be 4.1.3. All I can see in koji is this

Re: Minutes from Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-02-19)

Quoting Honza Horak (2015-02-19 19:48:59) > * Dockerfiles recommended tips (hhorak, 18:15:21) >* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Tasklist > (hhorak, 18:15:45) >* LINK: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Hhorak/Draft/task-dockerfile-rules > (hhorak, 18:

Re: Running docker in a mock chroot

Quoting Dridi Boukelmoune (2014-11-05 23:45:45) > Hi, > > I haven't really tried, I only wanted to look at fig 1.0 currently in > f21 updates-testing. So I --shell'ed inside my fedora-21-x86_64 > mock chroot after installing fig, and tried to start a docker daemon > in the background but it failed

Re: Django-1.7 for Fedora 21

Latest & greatest, please. Especially since django 1.7 brought south (migrations) to core. Also, in a couple of months, I believe that a lot of folks would love to use 1.7, so let's make their life easier (by NOT doing 'pip install'). Tomas -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org h

Re: Future changes in the new package and new branch processes

Quoting Christopher (2014-09-08 21:35:23) > It'd be great if the fedpkg tool could do some of this. For example, fedpkg > could create git repos locally, from a template and a few questions, for > new packages, which could be pushed somewhere for review (usually GitHub, > I'd imagine). It could eve

Re: Future changes in the new package and new branch processes

Quoting Pierre-Yves Chibon (2014-09-08 11:55:06) > On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 11:31:58AM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > > Quoting Pierre-Yves Chibon (2014-09-05 17:08:39) > > > New procedure > > > = > > > > > > * packager opens a review-request

Re: Future changes in the new package and new branch processes

Quoting Pierre-Yves Chibon (2014-09-05 17:08:39) > New procedure > = > > * packager opens a review-request on bugzilla > * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to ? > * reviewer does the review > * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to + > * packager goes to pkgdb2 to request new pac