On Fri, 2020-01-10 at 08:03 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> No, that's not true. Anybody can tag their builds into a
> f31-updates-candidate and such tags.
I have to test it to see, ATM without stupid tests on production which
I don't want to do, I can't test it.
But if so, is less problematic .
A
No, that's not true. Anybody can tag their builds into a
f31-updates-candidate and such tags.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:03 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 09:17 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 10:32:42PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > Hi, a little "
On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 09:17 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 10:32:42PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > Hi, a little "by the way" , I think if koji fails to tag the build
> > or
> > anything else, the final result should be failed, to avoid
> > inconsistencies. I opened an
On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 10:32:42PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi, a little "by the way" , I think if koji fails to tag the build or
> anything else, the final result should be failed, to avoid
> inconsistencies. I opened an issue on koji [1]
> [1]
> https://pagure.io/koji/issue/1895
We'll see
On Wed, 2020-01-08 at 09:58 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:48:54AM -0700, Brad Bell wrote:
> > I do not understand the state of the following build:
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=40063178
> >
> > When I attempt to resubmit it I get:
> > cppad>fedpk
On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:48:54AM -0700, Brad Bell wrote:
> I do not understand the state of the following build:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=40063178
>
> When I attempt to resubmit it I get:
> cppad>fedpkg build
> Could not execute build: Package cppad-2020.0-1.fc31
I do not understand the state of the following build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=40063178
When I attempt to resubmit it I get:
cppad>fedpkg build
Could not execute build: Package cppad-2020.0-1.fc31 has already been built
Note: You can skip this check with --skip-nvr-
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 11:57:21AM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> Koji is misbehaving ("again"|"still?").
>
> If you search for a package, the search result is available fast.
> If you searched for a build around 8-9 am CET (~3h ago) today, the
> search did not return in a reason
Hi Kevin,
Koji is misbehaving ("again"|"still?").
If you search for a package, the search result is available fast.
If you searched for a build around 8-9 am CET (~3h ago) today, the
search did not return in a reasonable timeframe, to be exact: it did not
return at all.
Now, the same search ret
On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 05:27:19PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 22:41, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > As some of you may know, we have been having issues with koji and bodhi
> > over the holidays. :( koji would sometimes not tag builds or error them
> > with odd error messages an
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 22:41, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> As some of you may know, we have been having issues with koji and bodhi
> over the holidays. :( koji would sometimes not tag builds or error them
> with odd error messages and bodhi wasn't pushing updates.
>
> I'm happy to report that the underlyi
Il 05/01/20 10:54, Pierre-Yves Chibon ha scritto:
>
> You may also want to print/check when these updates were created, I suspect a
> number of them may be older than this outage.
>
> Also, this has been problematic in the past but since bodhi now simply ignores
> these updates when doing the compo
On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 09:37:04AM -, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:55:27PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Yes, they are all because bodhi started composing them, moved their tags
> > and then failed (because koji wasn't tagging things in a timely manner).
>
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:37 AM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
> There are also a bunch of broken updates in Bodhi which were created without
> any build. Here it is a list of aliases:
[snip]
> FEDORA-2019-98ef2a04fc created by jjames
> FEDORA-2019-f57b34f7a0 created by jjames
Both of these appear
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:55:27PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Yes, they are all because bodhi started composing them, moved their tags
> and then failed (because koji wasn't tagging things in a timely manner).
>
> So, they need to be retagged back and resubmitted, or bodhi tweaked to
> see
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:55:27PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > However, due to the koji issues builds were in a state where bodhi
> > ejected many of them from updates pushes. We are working on cleaning
> > up the state of those updates and there's no need for maintainers to
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> However, due to the koji issues builds were in a state where bodhi
> ejected many of them from updates pushes. We are working on cleaning
> up the state of those updates and there's no need for maintainers to do
> anything with those updates at this time.
At least in this case
As some of you may know, we have been having issues with koji and bodhi
over the holidays. :( koji would sometimes not tag builds or error them
with odd error messages and bodhi wasn't pushing updates.
I'm happy to report that the underlying issue seems to be fixed now.
We hopefully will have a
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?
> >>
> >
> >I posted a karma comment recently without issue
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?
I posted a karma comment recently without issue.
I just got a 500 status twice, though both copies of the comment ended up
being r
On 08/13/2012 11:51 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
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
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
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 something because I
got email(s) of my comments
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager
23 matches
Mail list logo
