Il 08/01/20 08:09, Artem Tim ha scritto:
> vokoscreenNG packaged now. Nice to have such app available in official repos.
>
> F31: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a489a2436a
> F30: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-aa27dbce21
> __
Awesome!
On 1/8/20 10:09 AM, Artem Tim wrote:
vokoscreenNG packaged now. Nice to have such app available in official repos.
F31: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a489a2436a
F30: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-aa27dbce21
___
vokoscreenNG packaged now. Nice to have such app available in official repos.
F31: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a489a2436a
F30: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-aa27dbce21
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fe
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 08:36:07 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Which is something you can only fix with an RPM Fusion package,
> > if you "control" (= build) all depending packages.
>
> RPM Fusion will need to copy and rebuild all such packages and this is a
> huge headache for maintain
On 03.01.2020 20:01, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Which is something you can only fix with an RPM Fusion package,
> if you "control" (= build) all depending packages.
RPM Fusion will need to copy and rebuild all such packages and this is a
huge headache for maintainers and currently forbidden by repo
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 16:30:54 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 03.01.2020 11:14, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > What sort of "huge headache" would that be?
>
> 1. Most of ffmpeg-capable applications use compile-time checks for
> available codecs presence.
Which is something you can only
On 03.01.2020 11:14, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> What sort of "huge headache" would that be?
1. Most of ffmpeg-capable applications use compile-time checks for
available codecs presence.
2. Sync errors between repositories like chromium and
chromium-libs-media-freeworld.
> Third party repos like RP
I did draft package of vokoscreenNG if someone interesting
RR: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1787578
Works without ffmpeg. Thanks for tip @Neal.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-l
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:00 AM František Šumšal wrote:
>
> On 1/3/20 10:49 AM, Leigh Scott wrote:
> >> But what about users which actually have ffmpeg installed? Do you think
> >> they don't deserve having peek in menu?
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, 04:02 John M. Harris Jr >> wrote:
> >
> > NO,
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 12:14:37 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > > I suspect there would be interest in having a royalty free version of
> > > > FFMPEG
> > >
> > > No, please, don't do this. It will be a huge headache for RPM Fusion
> > > maintainers.
> >
> > What sort of "h
On Friday, 03 January 2020 at 11:14, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 13:07:40 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>
> > On 02.01.2020 10:05, Benson Muite wrote:
> > > I suspect there would be interest in having a royalty free version of
> > > FFMPEG
> >
> > No, please, don't do
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 13:07:40 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 02.01.2020 10:05, Benson Muite wrote:
> > I suspect there would be interest in having a royalty free version of
> > FFMPEG
>
> No, please, don't do this. It will be a huge headache for RPM Fusion
> maintainers.
What sort
On 1/3/20 10:49 AM, Leigh Scott wrote:
>> But what about users which actually have ffmpeg installed? Do you think
>> they don't deserve having peek in menu?
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, 04:02 John M. Harris Jr > wrote:
>
> NO, it's not required on cinnamon, users can use the screenshot+ Record
> de
> But what about users which actually have ffmpeg installed? Do you think
> they don't deserve having peek in menu?
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, 04:02 John M. Harris Jr wrote:
NO, it's not required on cinnamon, users can use the screenshot+ Record desktop
applet instead.
___
On 1/2/20 6:55 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 7:34:27 PM MST Leigh Scott wrote:
Why we should drop such useful app just because it doesn't work on
Cinnamon? It works on GNOME without ffpmeg and rpm fusion repo, see
screenshot [1].
Please prevent your useless app fro
But what about users which actually have ffmpeg installed? Do you think
they don't deserve having peek in menu?
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, 04:02 John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 7:34:27 PM MST Leigh Scott wrote:
> > > Why we should drop such useful app just because it doesn't w
On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 7:34:27 PM MST Leigh Scott wrote:
> > Why we should drop such useful app just because it doesn't work on
> > Cinnamon? It works on GNOME without ffpmeg and rpm fusion repo, see
> > screenshot [1].
>
>
> Please prevent your useless app from displaying in cinnamon menu
On 02.01.2020 13:12, Damian Ivanov wrote:
> Peek is on Flathub btw.
Flathub is a third-party repository with low-quality packages. I'm not
going to trust it.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.f
Il 02/01/20 12:05, Michael Schwendt ha scritto:
> On Thu, 02 Jan 2020 10:02:25 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
>
>> In my original post I had CC'ed `peek-maintai...@fedoraproject.org` and
>> I supposed this would have reached you directly. I did not know this
>> isn't working anymore (I later
On 02. 01. 20 13:04, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 11:24:08 +, Tom Hughes wrote:
Actually I believe PACKAGENAME-maintainers@ (with an s) is now the
preferred form and -owner is regarded as deprecated.
Is this documented _anywhere_?
The following page still mentions the -owne
Peek is on Flathub btw.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 2:08 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 02.01.2020 10:05, Benson Muite wrote:
> > I suspect there would be interest in having a royalty free version of FFMPEG
>
> No, please, don't do this. It will be a huge headache for RPM Fusion
> maintaine
On 02.01.2020 10:05, Benson Muite wrote:
> I suspect there would be interest in having a royalty free version of FFMPEG
No, please, don't do this. It will be a huge headache for RPM Fusion
maintainers.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 11:24:08 +, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Actually I believe PACKAGENAME-maintainers@ (with an s) is now the
> preferred form and -owner is regarded as deprecated.
Is this documented _anywhere_?
The following page still mentions the -owner alias
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infr
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020, 12:15 Artem Tim wrote:
> No prob. :) But i didn't received any notification so this could be
> upsetting a little bit if package was retired. Community barely fixed crash
> dump recently [1] and Fedora users before often write me on email with
> various questions, so this mak
On 02/01/2020 11:05, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jan 2020 10:02:25 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
In my original post I had CC'ed `peek-maintai...@fedoraproject.org` and
I supposed this would have reached you directly. I did not know this
isn't working anymore (I later received an
No prob. :) But i didn't received any notification so this could be upsetting a
little bit if package was retired. Community barely fixed crash dump recently
[1] and Fedora users before often write me on email with various questions, so
this makes me believe that app is not useless and users int
On Thu, 02 Jan 2020 10:02:25 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> In my original post I had CC'ed `peek-maintai...@fedoraproject.org` and
> I supposed this would have reached you directly. I did not know this
> isn't working anymore (I later received an unreachable address in
> reply). So I d
Il 02/01/20 09:52, Artem Tim ha scritto:
> Perhaps OP should not sneaky asking for retiring functional package? Maybe he
> should instead file a bug and ask maintainer first about this and discuss
> with it? I might have miss this thread and didn't even notice it. TBH all
> this just demotivatin
On 1/2/20 12:05 PM, Benson Muite wrote:
On 1/2/20 11:37 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 02/01/2020 06:53, Benson Muite wrote:
There are a number of screen recording alternatives that are simpler
than OBS Studio, including vokoscreen, Kazam, Simplescreenrecorder
etc, The main problem is that most d
On 1/2/20 11:37 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 02/01/2020 06:53, Benson Muite wrote:
There are a number of screen recording alternatives that are simpler
than OBS Studio, including vokoscreen, Kazam, Simplescreenrecorder
etc, The main problem is that most depend on FFMPEG. FFMPEG has a
license tha
Perhaps OP should not sneaky asking for retiring functional package? Maybe he
should instead file a bug and ask maintainer first about this and discuss with
it? I might have miss this thread and didn't even notice it. TBH all this just
demotivating from packaging something at all.
__
On 02/01/2020 06:53, Benson Muite wrote:
There are a number of screen recording alternatives that are simpler
than OBS Studio, including vokoscreen, Kazam, Simplescreenrecorder etc,
The main problem is that most depend on FFMPEG. FFMPEG has a license
that is compatible with the main Fedora rep
> You started the drama by picking on cinnamon!
Me started drama? Cinnamon mentioned by original poster and he even post a link
on github issue where title is:
'Peek fails to start in Cinnamon on Fedora 30'
https://github.com/phw/peek/issues/485
___
de
> On 1/2/20 9:18 AM, Artem Tim wrote:
> There are a number of screen recording alternatives that are
> simpler
> than OBS Studio, including vokoscreen, Kazam, Simplescreenrecorder etc,
> The main problem is that most depend on FFMPEG. FFMPEG has a license
> that is compatible with the main Fedor
> * Leigh Scott [02/01/2020 02:34] :
>
> This is not being excellent to each other. Please consider respecting the
> project policy when you are posting to a Fedora mailing list.
>
> Emmanuel
Perhaps he shouldn't have singled out cinnamon when it equally applies to all
DE's apart from gnome!
__
> Also this whole issue is more suitable for regular bug report, not for such
> drama in
> mailing list and salt.
You started the drama by picking on cinnamon!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dev
The problem with this approach is that when you install ffmpeg, it still
won't be shown in those DEs.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020, 01:57 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 09:13:28PM -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > > "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or
> otherwise)
>
On 1/2/20 9:18 AM, Artem Tim wrote:
What is alternative to Peek? OBS Studio is totally different beast. OBS more
advanced, using Qt framework, available only in RPM Fusion repo. Users asked
many time about this Peek and why it is not available in repo and they really
like it because of their
> Please prevent your useless app from displaying in cinnamon menu, I'm sure
> Mate, XFCE
> and LXDE would also like it removed from their menus as well.
What is alternative to Peek? OBS Studio is totally different beast. OBS more
advanced, using Qt framework, available only in RPM Fusion repo.
> Then OnlyShowIN=Gnome in the desktop file seems like a possible
> solution.
@Kevin, i'll do shortly. Also i filed a bug in upstream
https://github.com/phw/peek/issues/539
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an em
* Leigh Scott [02/01/2020 02:34] :
>
> Please prevent your useless app []
This is not being excellent to each other. Please consider respecting the
project policy when you are posting to a Fedora mailing list.
Emmanuel
___
devel mailing list -- deve
> Why we should drop such useful app just because it doesn't work on Cinnamon?
> It works
> on GNOME without ffpmeg and rpm fusion repo, see screenshot [1].
Please prevent your useless app from displaying in cinnamon menu, I'm sure
Mate, XFCE and LXDE would also like it removed from their menus
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 09:13:28PM -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or
> > otherwise)
> > MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora repositories."
>
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/WeakDependencie
> "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or otherwise)
> MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora repositories."
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/WeakDependencies/
> "As with regular dependencies, weak dependencies MUST be satisfiab
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 08:33:26PM -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > The `peek` package has been approved in Fedora repositories [1], but it
> > doesn't even start without ffmpeg installed [2], which is not
> > distributed in Fedora repositories (but is available in rpmfusion):
>
> Why we should drop
> The `peek` package has been approved in Fedora repositories [1], but it
> doesn't even start without ffmpeg installed [2], which is not
> distributed in Fedora repositories (but is available in rpmfusion):
Why we should drop such useful app just because it doesn't work on Cinnamon? It
works o
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 15:51 Mattia Verga via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> The `peek` package has been approved in Fedora repositories [1], but it
> doesn't even start without ffmpeg installed [2], which is not
> distributed in Fedora repositories (but is available in rpmfusion):
Peek only relies on ffmpeg for screen recording on non-GNOME desktops
on X11, afaik.
On GNOME, it uses the org.gnome.Shell.Screencast interface which
offloads all of the heavy work to GNOME shell.
-- Carson Black [jan Pontaoski]
Am Mi., 1. Jan. 2020 um 09:51 Uhr schrieb Mattia Verga via devel
:
48 matches
Mail list logo
