On 09. 09. 19 10:09, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 09. 09. 19 3:53, Scott Talbert wrote:
Hi,
I need to create a multi-package bodhi update for F30 and F31 to fix a bug.
Could a provenpackager help me out please? I only have commit rights to
wxpython.
For F31, please create an update with builds
On 09. 09. 19 3:53, Scott Talbert wrote:
Hi,
I need to create a multi-package bodhi update for F30 and F31 to fix a bug.
Could a provenpackager help me out please? I only have commit rights to wxpython.
For F31, please create an update with builds and tag bug #1739469:
python-fsleyes
Hi,
I need to create a multi-package bodhi update for F30 and F31 to fix a
bug. Could a provenpackager help me out please? I only have commit
rights to wxpython.
For F31, please create an update with builds and tag bug #1739469:
python-fsleyes-0.30.1-1.fc31
python-fsleyes-widgets-0.8.0-1
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of wx
2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no
response to the bugs I filed). R
On 16.8.2018 01:45, Scott Talbert wrote:
Hi,
I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of
wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and
no response to the bugs I filed
On 16.8.2018 04:46, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of
wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of
wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no
response to the bugs I filed). Rat
> I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of
> wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
> requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no
> response to the bugs I filed). Rather than go through the non-respo
Hi,
I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of
wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull
requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no
response to the bugs I filed). Rather than go through the non-respons
Since nobody replied in ~24h, I went ahead and pushed the green button ;)
It's building now.
Zbyszek
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 09:07:18AM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Vascom wrote:
>
> >I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not
> >need %if...).B
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Vascom wrote:
I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not
need %if...).Because for old releases it has separate branches.
Yes, that's fine too. It appears, however, that the spec was being
maintained for epel and older fedoras, so I made the
I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not
need %if...).
Because for old releases it has separate branches.
ср, 18 окт. 2017 г. в 3:31, Scott Talbert :
> The audacity package needs a small change and rebuild in rawhide after I
> merged compat-wxGTK3-gtk2 into wxGTK3.
The audacity package needs a small change and rebuild in rawhide after I
merged compat-wxGTK3-gtk2 into wxGTK3. Can someone please merge this PR
[1] (can provenpackagers merge arbitrary PR's on src.fedoraproject.org?),
or just commit this change and rebuild?
Thanks
Scott
[1] https://src.fedo
On 7 August 2014 13:27, Till Maas wrote:
> This is done now.
>
> Thank you!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 11:16:09AM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 6 August 2014 23:02, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 05:15:17PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> >
> > > So, I went to orphan the Fedora branches of cmake28 (not sure why these
> > > branches were created in
On Aug 7, 2014 6:16 PM, "Jonathan Underwood"
wrote:
> As I say below, I orphaned the F21, F20, F19 branches on pkgdb. Then I
checked out the F21 branch with fedpkg and tried to run the command below.
Have I misunderstood your question?
Please also retire the master branch(not f21) as well. Or whe
On 6 August 2014 23:02, Till Maas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 05:15:17PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>
> > So, I went to orphan the Fedora branches of cmake28 (not sure why these
> > branches were created in the first place - I had meant only to create an
>
> What did you request where?
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 05:15:17PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> So, I went to orphan the Fedora branches of cmake28 (not sure why these
> branches were created in the first place - I had meant only to create an
What did you request where?
> EL6 branch). Anyway, stupidly, I orphaned them in
On 08/06/2014 10:15 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
Hi folks,
So, I went to orphan the Fedora branches of cmake28 (not sure why these
branches were created in the first place - I had meant only to create an EL6
branch). Anyway, stupidly, I orphaned them in pkgdb before running fedpkg
retire on the
Hi folks,
So, I went to orphan the Fedora branches of cmake28 (not sure why these
branches were created in the first place - I had meant only to create an
EL6 branch). Anyway, stupidly, I orphaned them in pkgdb before running
fedpkg retire on the relevant branch, which is precisely the wrong way
r
Great. Thank you!
Il 09/07/2013 20:35, Jochen Schmitt ha scritto:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
Is there any provenpackager t
On Ter, 2013-07-09 at 20:35 +0200, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
>
> > There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
> > (and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
> > Is there any provenpackag
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
> There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
> (and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
> Is there any provenpackager that can take care of this?
I have create an update request and
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
> I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
> built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work
> with the newer.
I have take this task.
Best Regards:
Jochen Schmitt
--
devel mailing list
de
On Ter, 2013-07-09 at 18:48 +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
> Hi,
> I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
> built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work with
> the newer.
+1
I need it too
> There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebu
Hi,
I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work with
the newer.
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji). I
Hello,
sorry to ask again for people from the provenpackagers group but I don't
know how could I fix it.
Can someone apply the small patch pasted here in the bug [1] and issue a
pango update for Fedora 18?
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=902861
Thanks & regards,
--Simone
--
Yo
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Simone Caronni wrote:
> On 11 June 2013 09:31, Simone Caronni wrote:
>>
>> I'm still looking for a fix to the second bug. Any provenpackager willing
>> to help with the second issue?
>
>
> ...or willing to grant me commit access.
>
> Thanks,
> --Simone
>
Didn't
2013-06-03 13:48, Simone Caronni skrev:
> any provenpackager willing to push these 2 fixes? One is really trivial
> and the other one is simply a typo.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=883983
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948613
I have fixed the Brasero issue; the 2
Hello,
any provenpackager willing to push these 2 fixes? One is really trivial and
the other one is simply a typo.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=883983
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948613
Thanks & regards,
--Simone
--
You cannot discover new oceans unless you have
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> There are still about half a dozen packages left that failed the recent
> mass rebuild because they contain source-code dependencies on obsolete
> versions of libpng and/or libtiff. I've filed patches to fix them,
> but don't have permissions to
Adam Williamson writes:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 01:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There are still about half a dozen packages left that failed the recent
>> mass rebuild because they contain source-code dependencies on obsolete
>> versions of libpng and/or libtiff. I've filed patches to fix them,
>
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 01:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> There are still about half a dozen packages left that failed the recent
> mass rebuild because they contain source-code dependencies on obsolete
> versions of libpng and/or libtiff. I've filed patches to fix them,
> but don't have permissions to
There are still about half a dozen packages left that failed the recent
mass rebuild because they contain source-code dependencies on obsolete
versions of libpng and/or libtiff. I've filed patches to fix them,
but don't have permissions to do it myself. If any provenpackagers
have a bit of time t
On 06/23/2011 09:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 20:22 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
> wrote:
>> To fix [1] and [2] dependency rebuild required.
>> Scratch build successful [3], if someone can help on it, I'm ready
>> commit and push changes in git.
>> Rebuild for
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 20:22 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
wrote:
> To fix [1] and [2] dependency rebuild required.
> Scratch build successful [3], if someone can help on it, I'm ready
> commit and push changes in git.
> Rebuild for rawhide and f15 required.
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.re
To fix [1] and [2] dependency rebuild required.
Scratch build successful [3], if someone can help on it, I'm ready
commit and push changes in git.
Rebuild for rawhide and f15 required.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710837
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712304
[3
Am Sonntag, den 05.06.2011, 13:19 +0200 schrieb Nicola Soranzo:
> razertool package is dead upstream
razercfg [1] it the successor of razertool. If somebody packages it up,
it would be nice to have the package properly obsolete razertool.
Regards,
Christoph
[1] http://bues.ch/cms/hacking/razerc
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 13:19:46 +0200, NS wrote:
> razertool package is dead upstream and has been deprecated by its maintainer
> Andreas Osowski (th0br0). Unfortunately he didn't complete all the steps to
> correctly remove a package:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_e
razertool package is dead upstream and has been deprecated by its maintainer
Andreas Osowski (th0br0). Unfortunately he didn't complete all the steps to
correctly remove a package:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
I reported the problem at
https://bugzilla.
It seems this bug related to twisted + gtk is open since far longer
than really needed:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=660137
is there any provenpackager around with some spare cycle to apply the
provided patch?
Thanks in advance
G.
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.
41 matches
Mail list logo
