On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 09:10 +, Mattia Verga wrote:
> Il 12/13/18 3:36 PM, Randy Barlow ha scritto:
> > * Remove critpath karma[5].
> >
> I know Fedora wants to move to a more community driven process, but
> I
> think the ideas behind adamw proposal [1] of the critpath field are
> still valid
On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 09:36 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> * Change how the edit APIs work so that a diff is sent rather than
> the
> entire set of fields[4].
>
>
> [4] https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2208
I've made this one a little more expansive - the real problem is that
Bodhi's
Il 12/13/18 3:36 PM, Randy Barlow ha scritto:
> * Remove critpath karma[5].
>
I know Fedora wants to move to a more community driven process, but I
think the ideas behind adamw proposal [1] of the critpath field are
still valid.
I think we could make regular users post regular karma only and
pr
updates
with 100+ packages).
> * Drop Python 2 support in the client[1] (we will need some
> dependencies to move to Python 3 to bring this to Rawhide.)
+1, by the time bodhi 4 is out, a large part of the python2 stack will
be gone.
> * Switch to OpenID Connect[2], which will require bac
lias (the string
that looks like FEDORA-2018-abcde) as the only identifier[0].
* Drop Python 2 support in the client[1] (we will need some
dependencies to move to Python 3 to bring this to Rawhide.)
* Switch to OpenID Connect[2], which will require backwards
incompatible changes in the auth
> Greetings fellow Fedorans!
>
> I am about to start working on a set of backwards incompatible changes
> to Bodhi for its upcoming 4.0.0 release (Bodhi follows Semantic
> Versioning[0]):
>
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/projects/6
>
> If the thought of backwa
Greetings fellow Fedorans!
I am about to start working on a set of backwards incompatible changes
to Bodhi for its upcoming 4.0.0 release (Bodhi follows Semantic
Versioning[0]):
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/projects/6
If the thought of backwards incompatible changes to Bodhi raises one
Randy Barlow wrote:
> I just
> wanted to send out a friendly reminder of this policy because I'm
> concerned about the stability of Fedora and EPEL. Thank you for reading!
I was corrected by fale in #fedora-devel (Thanks!) that there is a
formal policy for releasing backwards-incomp
Hello fellow Fedora hackers!
I've noticed a few times recently that some backwards incompatible
changes were submitted to Bodhi. I would like to implore us all to
remember that we have users who may become confused and/or frustrated
when a dnf/yum upgrade/update causes their system not to
