Re: How to correctly use Upstream release monitoring functionality?

V Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 08:34:50AM +0200, Petr Pisar napsal(a): > You can also check an archive of the notification > . > There is

Re: How to correctly use Upstream release monitoring functionality?

V Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 02:03:36AM -, Felix Wang napsal(a): > I see the Fedora documentation about Upstream release monitoring. First, add > the project to Anitya and map it to the corresponding Fedora package, and > secondly, enable the monitoring in its fedora-src repository. I

How to correctly use Upstream release monitoring functionality?

I see the Fedora documentation about Upstream release monitoring. First, add the project to Anitya and map it to the corresponding Fedora package, and secondly, enable the monitoring in its fedora-src repository. I have set these for cpr package, but I didn't receive the related message

Re: Release monitoring for stable releases only

This feature is implemented in hotness, which is commenting in Bugzilla. It's already implemented in dist-git and Pagure as well. This is now waiting for new version of Pagure to be available in Fedora infra, dist-git with the changes is already available. :-) You can look at the upcoming monit

Re: Release monitoring for stable releases only

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 1:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 7:02 AM Jaroslav Skarvada wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > it seems Anitya correctly distinguishes stable and pre-release > > releases but where to set that I want Fedora bugs only for the stable > > releases? IIRC Pagure had

Re: Release monitoring for stable releases only

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 7:02 AM Jaroslav Skarvada wrote: > > Hi, > > it seems Anitya correctly distinguishes stable and pre-release > releases but where to set that I want Fedora bugs only for the stable > releases? IIRC Pagure had a switch for it, but I am unable to find it > on the https://src.f

Release monitoring for stable releases only

Hi, it seems Anitya correctly distinguishes stable and pre-release releases but where to set that I want Fedora bugs only for the stable releases? IIRC Pagure had a switch for it, but I am unable to find it on the https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/. There is only "No-Monitoring", "Monitoring", an

Re: Curious how Upstream Release Monitoring works

Dne 14. 12. 22 v 16:41 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:38 PM Ron Olson wrote: Hey all- I’m curious how Upstream Monitoring works; I got a BZ filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2153189 Right? that Swift 5.7.2 is available, which I’m building now, bu

Re: Curious how Upstream Release Monitoring works

There is a plan to automate that when you request a new package in Fedora [0], but it's still work in progress. The notification settings are now explained in the-new-hotness documentation [1] with new coming in upcoming release of src.fedoraproject.org. Michal [0] - https://pagure.io/releng

Re: Curious how Upstream Release Monitoring works

On Wed, 2022-12-14 at 09:36 -0600, Ron Olson wrote: > Hey all- > > I’m curious how Upstream Monitoring works; I got a BZ filed that > Swift 5.7.2 is available, which I’m building now, but what surprised > me was how fast the new version was detected and brought to my > attention. Does it use The N

Re: Curious how Upstream Release Monitoring works

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:38 PM Ron Olson wrote: > > Hey all- > > I’m curious how Upstream Monitoring works; I got a BZ filed that Swift 5.7.2 > is available, which I’m building now, but what surprised me was how fast the > new version was detected and brought to my attention. Does it use The Ne

Curious how Upstream Release Monitoring works

Hey all- I’m curious how Upstream Monitoring works; I got a BZ filed that Swift 5.7.2 is available, which I’m building now, but what surprised me was how fast the new version was detected and brought to my attention. Does it use The New Hotness? I set that up awhile ago but I don’t think it fil

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

On 26. 07. 22 21:03, Maxwell G via devel wrote: On 22/07/26 09:54AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: If you want to watch activity on a package you want The little 'watch' pulldown under The package description. You can set there if you want to watch bugs, commits, both, etc. If you only wanted to watch ko

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

On 22/07/26 09:54AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > If you want to watch activity on a package you want The little 'watch' > pulldown under The package description. You can set there if you want to > watch bugs, commits, both, etc. If you only wanted to watch koji builds, > you would need to set that in FMN

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 01:54:38PM +0200, Michal Schorm wrote: > Ah, It's a bit more tangled than I thought: > > I've somehow got an impression that the upstream release monitoring is > not related to Fedora, but I expected the BZ bot should be. > So I've looked for

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

Ah, It's a bit more tangled than I thought: I've somehow got an impression that the upstream release monitoring is not related to Fedora, but I expected the BZ bot should be. So I've looked for a place to report issues other than https://github.com/fedora-infra/anitya/issues, as

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 1:39 PM Michal Schorm wrote: > > Hello, > I don't know where to go, so I'm trying here. > > Package 'mariadb-connector-c' [1] I maintain has upstream release > monitoring enabled [2]. > The bot opened a BZ [3] for me to notify abo

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

> I would like the bot to stop trying making patches and doing scratch builds > on all my packages at all. > Is that possible? How? Isn't that controlled in Pagure, via the "monitoring" dropdown on the repo page? There's "no monitoring", "monitoring" and "monitoring with scratch builds" options.

Upstream Release Monitoring - bug report

Hello, I don't know where to go, so I'm trying here. Package 'mariadb-connector-c' [1] I maintain has upstream release monitoring enabled [2]. The bot opened a BZ [3] for me to notify about a new upstream release - as expected. It tried to come up with a patch and try

release-monitoring doesn't file a new bugzilla ticket when new version comes

Hi all, I have a problem (SSIA) with release-monitoring. I have a following project (sane-airscan): https://release-monitoring.org/project/121086/ which usually has a new version weekly or once in two weeks, but I haven't got any new bug about new version being released yet. Usuall

Re: Upstream release monitoring can't handle files in dist-git?!?

On 01/06/20 07:21 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: When did this nonsense start happening? Some time between April 2019: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558278#c10 and August 2019: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558278#c17 ___ dev

Upstream release monitoring can't handle files in dist-git?!?

When did this nonsense start happening? -- Forwarded message - From: Date: Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 7:12 AM Subject: [Bug 1842499] flmsg-4.0.15 is available To: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842499 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring < upstream-rele

Re: Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

, I recommend to turn off the monitoring as was recommended later in this thread. Michal On 01/02/2020 22:05, Chris wrote: Hi, I was just curious if there as a way to dial back the Upstream Release Monitoring and the automatic Bugzilla ticket generation from it? I pushed a new release of my

Re: Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

> Chris > > > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 4:11 PM Fabio Valentini > wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:06 PM Chris wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I was just curious if there as a way to dial back the

Re: Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

org page for your package should be enough. Fabio > > Chris > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 4:11 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: >> >> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:06 PM Chris wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I was just curious if there as a way to dial

Re: Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

) Chris On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 4:11 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:06 PM Chris wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I was just curious if there as a way to dial back the Upstream Release > Monitoring and the automatic Bugzilla ticket generation from it?

Re: Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 10:06 PM Chris wrote: > > Hi, > > I was just curious if there as a way to dial back the Upstream Release > Monitoring and the automatic Bugzilla ticket generation from it? > > I pushed a new release of my software to PyPi and I swear before I even

Anitya Upstream Release Monitoring - Dial back Auto-Bugzilla ticket generation

Hi, I was just curious if there as a way to dial back the Upstream Release Monitoring and the automatic Bugzilla ticket generation from it? I pushed a new release of my software to PyPi and I swear before I even got access to the shell again (from the successful twine upload message), I was

Re: Release-monitoring github issues?

On 23.9.2018 23:26, Jerry James wrote: On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:42 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: Yep. It's fixed but not yet rolled out to production, we ran into some other issues we wanted to fix up before rolling it out. I hope to move this service into our production openshift instance and upda

Re: Release-monitoring github issues?

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:42 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Yep. It's fixed but not yet rolled out to production, we ran into some > other issues we wanted to fix up before rolling it out. > > I hope to move this service into our production openshift instance and > update it next week. :) > > Sorry for t

Re: Release-monitoring github issues?

On 09/22/2018 01:52 PM, Jerry James wrote: > On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 2:48 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: >> This looks to be: >> >> https://github.com/release-monitoring/anitya/issues/581 > > That does indeed look like the issue. Thanks, Adam! Yep. It's fixed b

Re: Release-monitoring github issues?

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 2:48 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > This looks to be: > > https://github.com/release-monitoring/anitya/issues/581 That does indeed look like the issue. Thanks, Adam! -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mai

Re: Release-monitoring github issues?

ample, here is what the page for > python-fastcache (which has a new version) has to say: > > fastcache: no upstream version found. - > https://github.com/pbrady/fastcache/tags - > class="tag-name">([^<]*) > Is the lack of a closing '>' on ' thoug

Release-monitoring github issues?

I just saw a remark on another mailing list about an updated version of a package I maintain. Sure enough, a new version was released, but I never got email from release-monitoring.org about it. So I started checking, and I've got nearly 2 dozen packages with new versions upstream, but nary an em

Re: release-monitoring is telling me it has noticed (new) ceph-13.0.x

Le 2018-04-05 17:00, Tom Hughes a écrit : On 05/04/18 15:50, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: according to https://release-monitoring.org/project/267/ But the Homepage: in the above and the Source: in the .spec would seem to be saying that http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ is where the-new-hotness is

Re: release-monitoring is telling me it has noticed (new) ceph-13.0.x

Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: > according to https://release-monitoring.org/project/267/ > > But the Homepage: in the above and the Source: in the .spec would seem > to be saying that http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ is where > the-new-hotness is looking. If you pull up the 'Edit' page you can check

Re: release-monitoring is telling me it has noticed (new) ceph-13.0.x

On 05/04/18 15:50, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: according to https://release-monitoring.org/project/267/ But the Homepage: in the above and the Source: in the .spec would seem to be saying that http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ is where the-new-hotness is looking. And there is no ceph-13.x.y tar

Re: release-monitoring is telling me it has noticed (new) ceph-13.0.x

> > And there is no ceph-13.x.y tar at that location (yet). > > It's a maze of twisty passages. Or maybe at's a twisty maze of passages. > How do I find where release-monitoring is actually looking? It says it's using the GitHub backend. Annoyingly, you can't

release-monitoring is telling me it has noticed (new) ceph-13.0.x

ze of twisty passages. Or maybe at's a twisty maze of passages. How do I find where release-monitoring is actually looking? Thanks, -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email t

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On 03/23/2018 10:11 PM, Christopher wrote: >> > Thanks. That clarifies things significantly. "Docs could definitely be > better" is a severe understatement :) > > FWIW, I found the-new-hotness code at > https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness > I was going to try to do a pull request to im

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

imply > " > > release-monitoring.org". The name makes no sense, and creates > unnecessary > > confusion. > > It's a different application. release-monitoring (anitya) is the part > that polls for new releases and keeps track of whats current. > the-new-hotnes

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 12:20 AM Scott Talbert wrote: > On Sat, 24 Mar 2018, Christopher wrote: > > > I received the following message about a new version of a package, but > I'm > > unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* > interested > > in bugs being filed (or at leas

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

lso references pkgdb, but pkgdb is no longer available. See the downthread post for link... > > Also, why is this confusingly called "the-new-hotness" instead of simply " > release-monitoring.org". The name makes no sense, and creates unnecessary > confusion. It&#

Re: How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

On Sat, 24 Mar 2018, Christopher wrote: I received the following message about a new version of a package, but I'm unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* interested in bugs being filed (or at least... interested in trying it out). It also references pkgdb, but pkgdb i

How to change release-monitoring bug-filing without pkgdb?

I received the following message about a new version of a package, but I'm unable to figure out how to change these settings, because I *AM* interested in bugs being filed (or at least... interested in trying it out). It also references pkgdb, but pkgdb is no longer available. Also, why is this c

Release monitoring for COPR

What's the best way to monitor for new releases on a package in copr? I know the release-monitoring.org has "COPR" as a distribution that it knows about, but I'm not sure if that's the same as the copr repositories we have available. I'm also not sure how to tell it which package in which project (

Bug in Upstream Release Monitoring?

I just noticed that Upstream Release Monitoring failed to download an update for python-breathe because it used an extra "v". [1] Is this something wrong with my .spec file or is it a bug? Thanks, Dave 1: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=

Re: How to change upstream release monitoring in pagure?

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:33:13PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > You can change the anitya integration by opening a pull-request on > https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests > As you can see in the git repo there are files for each container/modules/rpm > having a specific setting. > You

Re: How to change upstream release monitoring in pagure?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 08:04:53PM +0800, Zamir Sun wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Jaroslav Skarvada > wrote: > > How to change upstream release monitoring, i.e. how to > > switch the states between disabled, monitoring, and > > monitoring with build? I didn

Re: How to change upstream release monitoring in pagure?

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote: > How to change upstream release monitoring, i.e. how to > switch the states between disabled, monitoring, and > monitoring with build? I didn't find anything related in [1], > so I tried: > Does anyone know how can

How to change upstream release monitoring in pagure?

How to change upstream release monitoring, i.e. how to switch the states between disabled, monitoring, and monitoring with build? I didn't find anything related in [1], so I tried: $ fedrepo-req preeny -m monitoring -t 1479022 But the request [2] was closed as invalid? What's t

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:51:31 +0200 Igor Gnatenko wrote: > I definitely fixed this issue: > https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/commit/2eed58c4ea09729f17e8c672196318d7028b0dba Excllent! Thank you. Looks like it's been merged and we just need to cut a new release and deploy it. Will

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

I definitely fixed this issue: https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/commit/2eed58c4ea09729f17e8c672196318d7028b0dba On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 15:34:07 -0400 > Avram Lubkin wrote: > >> Seems like this issue is almost a year old. > > Sadly

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 15:34:07 -0400 Avram Lubkin wrote: > Seems like this issue is almost a year old. Sadly so. ;( If anyone would like to work on it they would be most welcome. Folks in #fedora-apps would be happy to answer any questions you have about the setup. kevin pgp4_x0lXPlWE.pgp

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

Seems like this issue is almost a year old. On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Avram Lubkin > wrote: > > > > I've noticed this a lot lately. I get a bugzilla for a new release in > > upstream, but it lists the current version in rawhide as t

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

2016-09-21 15:21 GMT+02:00 Avram Lubkin : > Anyone else seeing similar? I this something I can fix or is there a problem > with rebase helper? This is a known issue. the-new-hotness looks for rpms, not for srpms: See https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues/98 - Thomas _

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Avram Lubkin wrote: > > I've noticed this a lot lately. I get a bugzilla for a new release in > upstream, but it lists the current version in rawhide as the el7 > distribution. [...] I this something I can fix or is there a problem > with rebase helper? https://gi

Upstream Release Monitoring builds for EL7 instead of Rawhide

I've noticed this a lot lately. I get a bugzilla for a new release in upstream, but it lists the current version in rawhide as the el7 distribution. The rebase helper build fails because of something not supported in 7, like a Recommends tag. This is exactly what I'm seeing with the latest python-s

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

I would have just made the lib a subproject but the version is higher than that of the binary/overall version. Maybe the best thing to do is just to go ahead and bite the bullet and bump the Epoch and do it that way. Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:32:33 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Christian Stadelmann wrote: > > > Is there any reason why two packages provide tsqllib and tsqllib-devel? > > See https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/s?search=trustedqsl and the > > related .spec files

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 04:11:46PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > >I was notified by a user that a newer version of trustedqsl was > available > >so I looked into why I wasn't notified. > >For some reason it still thinks 1.13 i

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Christian Stadelmann < genodeft...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Is there any reason why two packages provide tsqllib and tsqllib-devel? > See https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/s?search=trustedqsl and the > related .spec files in git repos? They used to be sup

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:34:06 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:45:04PM -, Christian Stadelmann wrote: > > Is there any reason why two packages provide tsqllib and tsqllib-devel? See > > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/s?search=trustedqsl and the related > >

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:45:04PM -, Christian Stadelmann wrote: > Is there any reason why two packages provide tsqllib and tsqllib-devel? See > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/s?search=trustedqsl and the related > .spec files in git repos? Looks like one is using a tarball named tq

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

Is there any reason why two packages provide tsqllib and tsqllib-devel? See https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/s?search=trustedqsl and the related .spec files in git repos? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: Upstream release monitoring issue

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 04:11:46PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: >I was notified by a user that a newer version of trustedqsl was available >so I looked into why I wasn't notified. >For some reason it still thinks 1.13 is the current version when it is >2.2: >https://release-monito

Upstream release monitoring issue

I was notified by a user that a newer version of trustedqsl was available so I looked into why I wasn't notified. For some reason it still thinks 1.13 is the current version when it is 2.2: https://release-monitoring.org/project/4998/ I've tried tweaking things but can't seem to find the magic f

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

. E.g. Binaries are missing, soname bump change, header files are missing etc. Is there any possibility how to integrate a tool (e.g. rebase-helper) to upstream release monitoring system? Wow. This looks great and I'd love to have it integrated into the-new-hotness (that's the Fedora-speci

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

. E.g. Binaries are missing, soname bump change, header files are missing etc. Is there any possibility how to integrate a tool (e.g. rebase-helper) to upstream release monitoring system? Wow. This looks great and I'd love to have it integrated into the-new-hotness (that's the Fedora-speci

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 01:58:24PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:36:11 -0500, Ralph Bean wrote: > > > If you encounter bugs or have requests for enhancement, as always please do > > file them[6][7][8].. > > Done. Thanks for a premature April Fool's prank. ;) Heh, no p

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:36:11 -0500, Ralph Bean wrote: > If you encounter bugs or have requests for enhancement, as always please do > file them[6][7][8].. Done. Thanks for a premature April Fool's prank. ;) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mai

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

Dne 25.2.2015 v 15:23 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:08:40PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Dne 24.2.2015 v 14:25 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): >>> https://release-monitoring.org/projects/updates/failed >> Weird pagina

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:08:40PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dne 24.2.2015 v 14:25 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > > https://release-monitoring.org/projects/updates/failed > > Weird pagination When you filter? Yes I found this out and

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 24.2.2015 v 14:25 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > https://release-monitoring.org/projects/updates/failed Weird pagination Vít -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU7ddnAAoJEAzgnueZF7h8BGYP/jCRcMcGX2jDnd0tegwer9I8

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

5 at 2:36 PM, Ralph Bean > wrote: > > > >A A A - Enable the monitoring flag for that Fedora package in > pkgdb2[4]. > > > >A A I think this is the step people will forget to do. If there was > at least a > >

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

Fedora package in pkgdb2[4]. > > > >I think this is the step people will forget to do. If there was at > least a > >reminder on the release-monitoring website, that would be helpful. > > This is now `on` by default for every new package added to pkgdb. > For the old o

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

soname bump > change, header files are missing etc. > > Is there any possibility how to integrate a tool (e.g. rebase-helper) to > upstream release monitoring system? Wow. This looks great and I'd love to have it integrated into the-new-hotness (that's the Fedora-specifi

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

o. If there was at least a >reminder on the release-monitoring website, that would be helpful. This is now `on` by default for every new package added to pkgdb. For the old one you will have to do it manually (or via a script using the API). Pierre -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fe

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

This looks cool. On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Ralph Bean wrote: - Enable the monitoring flag for that Fedora package in pkgdb2[4]. I think this is the step people will forget to do. If there was at least a reminder on the release-monitoring website, that would be helpful. -- devel

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

the older, wiki-based Upstream > > Release > > Monitoring tools this week. You can read about the details of the trio of > > systems[1] now used to coordinate upstream release monitoring on the same > > old > > wiki page. > > Nice work, this is looking great! >

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

in bugzilla look much the same as they did before, but for > packagers there is one thing to note: the process of getting your package(s) > registered for upstream release monitoring has changed. Please see the > instructions[2] on the wiki page. > > Old packages that were li

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

On 02/20/2015 09:36 PM, Ralph Bean wrote: I'm proud to announce that the Infrastructure team has finished deploying the first iteration of our replacement for the older, wiki-based Upstream Release Monitoring tools this week. You can read about the details of the trio of systems[1] now us

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 03:36:11PM -0500, Ralph Bean wrote: > I'm proud to announce that the Infrastructure team has finished deploying the > first iteration of our replacement for the older, wiki-based Upstream Release > Monitoring tools this week. You can read about the details

Re: New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

Excerpts from Ralph Bean's message of 2015-02-21 06:36 +10:00: > I'm proud to announce that the Infrastructure team has finished deploying the > first iteration of our replacement for the older, wiki-based Upstream Release > Monitoring tools this week. You can read about the

New Upstream Release Monitoring Systems

I'm proud to announce that the Infrastructure team has finished deploying the first iteration of our replacement for the older, wiki-based Upstream Release Monitoring tools this week. You can read about the details of the trio of systems[1] now used to coordinate upstream release monitori

release-monitoring

Hi, I'm waiting for 2 days that release-monitoring firing bug [1] . https://github.com/pornel/pngquant/tags e got a tag with date of 3 days ago but release-monitoring not fire the bug. What I can do to fix this ? how I fire the bug ? or make monitoring check tags more often ? [1]

Re: Upstream release monitoring script gone awry?

On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 23:23 +0100, Till Maas wrote: > yes, there was an incomplete patch added unintentionally to the > script. > All faulty bugs should be closed and new bugs created if appropriate. > > Sorry for the trouble. No worries. Thank you for the quick fix :) -- Thanks, Warm regards,

Re: Upstream release monitoring script gone awry?

Hi, On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 08:53:15PM +1100, Ankur Sinha wrote: > I've received new bugs in the form: > > "bibus-1...5...2 is available". There's already a bug for 1.5.2. Is > something faulty with the script? yes, there was an incomplete patch added unintentionally to the script. All faulty b

Upstream release monitoring script gone awry?

Hi folks, I've received new bugs in the form: "bibus-1...5...2 is available". There's already a bug for 1.5.2. Is something faulty with the script? -- Thanks, Warm regards, Ankur: "FranciscoD" Please only print if necessary. Looking to contribute to Fedora? Look here: https://fedoraproject.

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring status posting

* Till Maas [17/07/2012 07:09] : > > I was asked to send to send the status of the last run of the Upstream > Release Monitoring tool to this list. It would consist of all lines in > http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log > that mention that a package is outdated. Would y

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring status posting

On 07/16/2012 07:38 PM, Till Maas wrote: I was asked to send to send the status of the last run of the Upstream Release Monitoring tool to this list. It would consist of all lines in http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log that mention that a package is outdated. Would you welcome this

Upstream Release Monitoring status posting

Hi, I was asked to send to send the status of the last run of the Upstream Release Monitoring tool to this list. It would consist of all lines in http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log that mention that a package is outdated. Would you welcome this or find it disturbing? I think it

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 06:27:50PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 08:37:06AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:02:49AM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > > > toshio python-docutils (none) > > > toshio python-unicodenazi dmalcolm > > > toshio trac-bazaar-plug

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

Hi, To ease the debugging, I uploaded the output of the last run: http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 10:24:17AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 07/04/2012 04:02 PM, Till Maas wrote: > >orion maven-ant-tasks java-sig > > This looks good to me and seems to work from cnucnu but I do get: > > Upstream Versions: ['2.0.10', '2.0.10', '2.0.6', '2.0.6', '2.0.7', > '2.0.7', '2

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 08:37:06AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:02:49AM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > toshio python-docutils (none) > > toshio python-unicodenazi dmalcolm > > toshio trac-bazaar-plugin (none) > > > At least these three seem to be working fine from cnucn

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

On 07/04/2012 04:02 PM, Till Maas wrote: Hello, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 09:43:48PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: python-bugzilla has been updated and the monitoring tool was adjusted to work again. But I noticed that monitoring fails for about 197 packages due to bad regular expressions, wrong URLs or

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:02:49AM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > Hello, > > work again. But I noticed that monitoring fails for about 197 packages > due to bad regular expressions, wrong URLs or unreachable upstream > website. So please check if any of your packages are affected and fix > the URL or r

Re: Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

Hello, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 09:43:48PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > due to the recent Bugzilla update Upstream Release Monitoring[0] cannot > report bugs currently. I noticed that there has been some recent > activity in python-bugzilla[1] that might fix this. > [0] https://fedor

Upstream Release Monitoring temporary down

Hi everyone, due to the recent Bugzilla update Upstream Release Monitoring[0] cannot report bugs currently. I noticed that there has been some recent activity in python-bugzilla[1] that might fix this. Regards Till [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring [1] https

  1   2   >