Thas a great plan Michael. Thank you.
Vít
Dne 15.3.2016 v 18:47 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a):
> Using a side tag seems like a great idea. When folks are brave enough
> to test rawhide for us, we should try to avoid breaking their
> computers. :)
>
> A few arbitrary answers:
>
> On Tue, 2016-03-
Using a side tag seems like a great idea. When folks are brave enough
to test rawhide for us, we should try to avoid breaking their
computers. :)
A few arbitrary answers:
On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 15:29 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> * Which packages should use this side tag?
Let's start by includin
On 15 March 2016 at 16:59, Peter Robinson wrote:
> The same packaging and process as is being used for the 3.19.92 mega
> update in the f24-gnome side tag.
We only use side tags for the later updates (.90, .91, .92, and .0)
which are supposed to be API stable.
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 15 March 2016 at 15:09, Jared K. Smith wrote:
>> Would you be willing to at least try it for a couple of iterations
>> and see how it goes?
>
> Three questions:
>
> * Which packages should use this side tag?
> * When *exactly* would we
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 13:06 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> So do you see any solution/improvement for this issue? I repeatedly
>> reported the breakages, I made some proposals (as simple as "send an
>> email"), which IMO should improve the si
On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 13:06 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> So do you see any solution/improvement for this issue? I repeatedly
> reported the breakages, I made some proposals (as simple as "send an
> email"), which IMO should improve the situation, but it seems that
> you
> prefer to keep status quo.
Dne 15.3.2016 v 16:17 Debarshi Ray napsal(a):
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:20:51AM +0100, V?t Ondruch wrote:
>> IOW some of Gnome developers don't care about sonames, "because it is
>> just development version".
> I find your repeated use of phrases like "don't care" to be insulting.
Sorry, I di
On 15 March 2016 at 15:09, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> Would you be willing to at least try it for a couple of iterations
> and see how it goes?
Three questions:
* Which packages should use this side tag?
* When *exactly* would we do the push from the side-tag to rawhide?
* Who would test rawhide+s
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:20:51AM +0100, V?t Ondruch wrote:
> IOW some of Gnome developers don't care about sonames, "because it is
> just development version".
I find your repeated use of phrases like "don't care" to be insulting.
Cheers,
Rishi
pgpEt91WTzy99.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
d
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> I think that would be even more confusing for projects that are not
> quite core GNOME, e.g. NetworkManager needing a new glib. We'd have to
> get any project depending on the core GNOME stuff to also build in the
> side tag for the duratio
So do you see any solution/improvement for this issue? I repeatedly
reported the breakages, I made some proposals (as simple as "send an
email"), which IMO should improve the situation, but it seems that you
prefer to keep status quo.
Vít
Dne 15.3.2016 v 11:18 Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> On 15
On 15 March 2016 at 10:00, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> So lets say I am using Gnome 3.19.90. The 3.19.91 is released and you
> start build, which takes some time (12h? 24h? 2 days? Have no idea).
Building all the components in mclazy takes a couple of hours. The
issue is that not all GNOME modules relea
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 15 March 2016 at 09:17, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> I'm somewhat confused where the problem is.
>> This is the problem:
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CI57RU5TGQZFGVTUJKM6S6WU2NU4VION/
>
Dne 15.3.2016 v 10:24 Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> On 15 March 2016 at 09:17, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> I'm somewhat confused where the problem is.
>> This is the problem:
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CI57RU5TGQZFGVTUJKM6S6WU2NU4VION/
> This
On 15 March 2016 at 09:17, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> I'm somewhat confused where the problem is.
> This is the problem:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CI57RU5TGQZFGVTUJKM6S6WU2NU4VION/
This isn't anything to do with the gnome-shell version being
Dne 15.3.2016 v 10:13 Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> On 15 March 2016 at 09:06, Tom Hughes wrote:
>> If bodhi is in use then you can bundle all the builds into one bodhi update
>> to ensure that nobody gets a broken tree.
> Why would people get a broken tree if there are no soname bumps?
Because
Dne 15.3.2016 v 10:03 Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> On 15 March 2016 at 08:53, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> so it would be little extra effort for you to do that same for f25/rawhide.
> I'm a bit confused where the problem is, at least my workflow is:
>
> * build latest release for rawhide
This shoul
On 15/03/16 09:13, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 15 March 2016 at 09:06, Tom Hughes wrote:
If bodhi is in use then you can bundle all the builds into one bodhi update
to ensure that nobody gets a broken tree.
Why would people get a broken tree if there are no soname bumps? If
there is a soname bu
On 15 March 2016 at 09:06, Tom Hughes wrote:
> If bodhi is in use then you can bundle all the builds into one bodhi update
> to ensure that nobody gets a broken tree.
Why would people get a broken tree if there are no soname bumps? If
there is a soname bump mclazy won't touch it with a bargepole
On 15/03/16 09:03, Richard Hughes wrote:
I'm a bit confused where the problem is, at least my workflow is:
* build latest release for rawhide
* if gnome-3.19.*, cherry-pick to f24
* if we're using bohdi, build for f24-gnome, else build for f24
That last step is backwards surely?
If bodhi is
On 15 March 2016 at 08:53, Peter Robinson wrote:
> so it would be little extra effort for you to do that same for f25/rawhide.
I'm a bit confused where the problem is, at least my workflow is:
* build latest release for rawhide
* if gnome-3.19.*, cherry-pick to f24
* if we're using bohdi, build
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 15 March 2016 at 08:04, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> So will it be 3rd time in 3 months you are going to broke my
>> Rawhide?
>
> I think using the F25 packages when F24 alpha hasn't even been
> released is probably asking for trouble. Are we s
On 15 March 2016 at 08:04, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> So will it be 3rd time in 3 months you are going to broke my
> Rawhide?
I think using the F25 packages when F24 alpha hasn't even been
released is probably asking for trouble. Are we supposed to be
maintaining F22, F23, F24, *and* F25 at this point?
Dne 14.3.2016 v 08:34 Kalev Lember napsal(a):
> Hi all,
>
> It's GNOME 3.19.92 release this week. As we are deep in the Alpha freeze
> in Fedora, this will stay in updates-testing for a while until the
> freeze is lifted and floodgates open a again.
>
> We have koji side tag to collect all the bu
24 matches
Mail list logo
