On Thursday, April 14, 2016 11:34:08 AM CDT Honza Šilhan wrote:
> > From: "Dennis Gilmore"
> >
> > On Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:54:36 AM CDT Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >
> From: "Dennis Gilmore"
>
> On Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:54:36 AM CDT Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> > > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
> > >> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:54:36 AM CDT Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
> >> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned rich
> >> PP> s
> From: "Kevin Fenzi"
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 07:54:36 -0400
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
> > >>
> > >> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F
On 5. 4. 2016 at 10:08:20, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 08:27:36 +0200
>
> Jan Zelený wrote:
> > Is there an estimate as to when the tooling (doesn't matter if it's
> > mash or pungi) might be ready? Looking at the IRC log, it doesn't say
> > what is the plan.
>
> I have no idea. :)
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 07:54:36 -0400
Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
> >>
> >> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned
> >> PP>
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
>>
>> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned rich
>> PP> strong dependencies in F24 only. This current text extends the ban
>>
On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
>
> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned rich
> PP> strong dependencies in F24 only. This current text extends the ban
> PP> to all Fedoras.
>
> PP> Is that intentional?
>
> It's cur
> "PP" == Petr Pisar writes:
PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned rich
PP> strong dependencies in F24 only. This current text extends the ban
PP> to all Fedoras.
PP> Is that intentional?
It's currently correct according to FESCo's request as I understood it.
While
On 6 Apr 2016 09:19, "Petr Pisar" wrote:
>
> On 2016-04-04, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi writes:
> >
> >KF> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintainers to not use
> >KF> rich boolean Requires/Recommends for the time being until tooling
> >KF> can catch up a
On 2016-04-04, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi writes:
>
>KF> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintainers to not use
>KF> rich boolean Requires/Recommends for the time being until tooling
>KF> can catch up and allow us to push updates with them.
>
> Could someone
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 08:27:36 +0200
Jan Zelený wrote:
> Is there an estimate as to when the tooling (doesn't matter if it's
> mash or pungi) might be ready? Looking at the IRC log, it doesn't say
> what is the plan.
I have no idea. :)
The two things that likely should be looked at are pungi and
On 1. 4. 2016 at 12:51:31, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Recently FPC oked the use of rich boolean deps. However, we have run
> into an issue where the tools used to push updates are not able to
> correctly handle these new dependencies.
>
> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask mainta
On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 18:07:50 -0500
Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > "KF" == Kevin Fenzi writes:
>
> KF> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintainers to not use
> KF> rich boolean Requires/Recommends for the time being until tooling
> KF> can catch up and allow us to push updates
> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi writes:
KF> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintainers to not use
KF> rich boolean Requires/Recommends for the time being until tooling
KF> can catch up and allow us to push updates with them.
Could someone look over the language in
https://fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 16:11:24 -0400
Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 04/01/2016 02:51 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Greetings.
> >
> > Recently FPC oked the use of rich boolean deps. However, we have run
> > into an issue where the tools used to push updates are not able to
> > correctly handle these new
On 04/01/2016 02:51 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Recently FPC oked the use of rich boolean deps. However, we have run
> into an issue where the tools used to push updates are not able to
> correctly handle these new dependencies.
>
> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintain
On 04/01/2016 02:51 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Recently FPC oked the use of rich boolean deps. However, we have run
> into an issue where the tools used to push updates are not able to
> correctly handle these new dependencies.
>
> At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintain
Greetings.
Recently FPC oked the use of rich boolean deps. However, we have run
into an issue where the tools used to push updates are not able to
correctly handle these new dependencies.
At today's FESCo meeting we decided to ask maintainers to not use rich
boolean Requires/Recommends for the t
19 matches
Mail list logo
