On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 06:21:11PM -0700, richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote:
>Way off topic, so much so that I considered emailing Matthew off list: how
>do you get the cloud-graphics in your signature?
The magic power of Unicode.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
Please see bottom-post Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the TELUS network
On 08/21/2013 04:39 PM, Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
On 08/21/2013 04:16 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/21/2013 04:01 PM, Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
On 08/21/2013 03:35 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
there are no f20 mock configurations on released Fedora releases in
place
Is fedpkg mock-config
On 08/21/2013 05:18 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:35:57 +0200
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Just one minor item:
How do you expect people to test f20 fixes at the moment?
There is no f20 repo on dl.fedoraproject.org, there are no f20 mock
configurations on released Fedora releases
IMHO, I'd prefer to do f20 as we have planned with the tight schedule,
then after the holidays look at the proposals for fedora.next and base
Fedora 21 on that.
If we do much of the fedora.next setup it's going to require a lot of
retooling and setup (just how much we can ask each team after we h
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:35:57 +0200
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Just one minor item:
> How do you expect people to test f20 fixes at the moment?
>
> There is no f20 repo on dl.fedoraproject.org, there are no f20 mock
> configurations on released Fedora releases in place, mirrormanager
> also so do
On 08/21/2013 04:16 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/21/2013 04:01 PM, Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
On 08/21/2013 03:35 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
there are no f20 mock configurations on released Fedora releases in
place
Is fedpkg mock-config problematic?
No. fedpkg mockbuild for f20 and mock -
On 08/21/2013 04:01 PM, Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
On 08/21/2013 03:35 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
there are no f20 mock configurations on released Fedora releases in place
Is fedpkg mock-config problematic?
No. fedpkg mockbuild for f20 and mock -r fedora-20-XXX are the problem.
Ralf
--
dev
On 08/21/2013 03:35 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
there are no f20 mock configurations on released Fedora releases in place
Is fedpkg mock-config problematic? Either vanilla or after editing from
baseurl=http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//repos/f20-build/315000/x86_64
to
baseurl=http://kojipkgs.f
On 08/21/2013 03:06 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 07:37:10 -0400
Josh Boyer wrote:
As far as I know, we've done a mass rebuild and we've branched. FESCo
has closed the Changes. Beyond that, I don't know what else has
actually s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 07:37:10 -0400
Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Dennis Gilmore
> wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400
> > Matthew Miller wrote:
> >
> >> On T
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400
> Matthew Miller wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talke
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Kushal Das wrote:
>> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Chris Murphy
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> What are the options? Push 21 back 3 months, and then 8 month instead of
- Original Message -
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Kushal Das wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Chris Murphy
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> What are the options? Push 21 back 3 months, and then 8 month instead of 6
> >> month intervals?
> >
> > May be pushing 21 for whole 6 mont
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Kushal Das wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>>
>> What are the options? Push 21 back 3 months, and then 8 month instead of 6
>> month intervals?
>
> May be pushing 21 for whole 6 months, which will give enough time to
> concentrate
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 06:47:31PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> >> I need to update the documentation. But we need to get to the point
> >> where the releng side is transparent and just happens. The crazy
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> What are the options? Push 21 back 3 months, and then 8 month instead of 6
> month intervals?
May be pushing 21 for whole 6 months, which will give enough time to
concentrate to the existing issues. Another option can be with keeping
same
On Aug 21, 2013, at 1:54 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> With the branch for F-20 just complete it makes it the perfect time to begin
> the change of process for F-21 then so let's keep the discussion going of
> what we should be doing now as F-21 is officially open for business...
> Otherwise we
On 21 Aug 2013 08:13, "Dennis Gilmore" wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400
> Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talked abo
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400
> Matthew Miller wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talke
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400
Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talked about
> > > slowing down the crazy train a little bit, probably no
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talked about slowing
> > down the crazy train a little bit, probably not for F20 at this point but
> > for F21, specifically so we all have a chance to work on those kind of
> > thing
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 06:47:31PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> I need to update the documentation. But we need to get to the point
>> where the releng side is transparent and just happens. The crazy
>> schedules we have had since f18 hav
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 06:47:31PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> I need to update the documentation. But we need to get to the point
> where the releng side is transparent and just happens. The crazy
> schedules we have had since f18 have allowed zero time for Release
> Engineering and QA to do mu
24 matches
Mail list logo
