Hi,
On 03/03/2010 10:30 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 02:27 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> Okay. This has gone on long enough. The signal is gone from the
>> following threads:
>
> The signal is not entirely gone, although it is getting weaker.
>
>> * FESCo wants to ban direct stable
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 20:14:16 Peter Jones wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 01:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> >> In the end, I think the question is not about giving users what users
> >> want (be it frequent updates or stalled releases), but giving users
> >> what we see as a be
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
> module
> instead of via subprocess.
>
> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/easy-karma-yum.patch
Thank you, I will integrate it later today, when I set up
On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
I've done some updates, and now rpmlint reports:
argyllcms.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
argyllcms.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
Does rpmlint need an update?
Richard.
-
I cannot do a yum update of openoffice on F-13 RC4 with the
updates-testing repo enabled. There seems to be an inconsistency around
the dep checking, with it wanting both the old and new versions of
openoffice.org-langpack-en. It is attempting to update from version
3.2.0-12.8.fc13.i686 to 3.2.0-12
On 03/04/2010 12:07 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>
> I've done some updates, and now rpmlint reports:
>
> argyllcms.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
> argyllcms.spec: W: n
On 04/03/10 10:17, Quentin Armitage wrote:
> I cannot do a yum update of openoffice on F-13 RC4 with the
> updates-testing repo enabled. There seems to be an inconsistency around
> the dep checking, with it wanting both the old and new versions of
> openoffice.org-langpack-en. It is attempting to u
On 03/04/2010 12:17 PM, Quentin Armitage wrote:
> I cannot do a yum update of openoffice on F-13 RC4 with the
> updates-testing repo enabled. There seems to be an inconsistency around
> the dep checking, with it wanting both the old and new versions of
> openoffice.org-langpack-en. It is attempting
On 03/04/2010 03:37 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>
>> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>>
> I've done some updates, and now rpmlint reports:
>
> argyllcms.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
> argyllcms
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 10:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 04/03/10 10:17, Quentin Armitage wrote:
> > I cannot do a yum update of openoffice on F-13 RC4 with the
> > updates-testing repo enabled. There seems to be an inconsistency around
> > the dep checking, with it wanting both the old and new
Paul Wouters writes:
>>> Upstream reports a logging bug.
>>
>> ??? You and Noa Resare were the only one who reported the non-logging as
>> a bug and some posts ago you said that you are not upstream. So, why do
>> you think that upstream reported a logging bug?
>
> I pointed you to http://bugs.n
Ironically it happened again, just now when these FESCO threads
are still warm.
My desktop gui processes leak enough mem that I need to restart
couple times a week or system will run out of memory. Today
I started with updating the F11 with yum. During the update,
I noticed that it's pulling in
too:
http://tuju.fi/fedora/11/kab-20100304.png
looks like that some icons are also missing, but hard to judge
as it wont start properly to interact with user.
Tuju
--
Ajatteleva ihminen tarvitsee unta.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/04/2010 05:13 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> This is exactly kind off stuff I don't have time now to solve,
> since I need to work. If such upgrade would have been put to
> next coming release, I could have upgraded when I have time,
> some weekend - it would not interrupted my working and ruin my
Not to mention that kaddressbook which contains all my business
> contacts, is broken too:
>
>http://tuju.fi/fedora/11/kab-20100304.png
>
> looks like that some icons are also missing, but hard to judge
> as it wont start properly to interact with user.
That's the proble
On Thursday 04 March 2010 13:13:18 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 05:13 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > This is exactly kind off stuff I don't have time now to solve,
> > since I need to work. If such upgrade would have been put to
> > next coming release, I could have upgraded when I have time,
Enrico Scholz wrote:
> %post can give out something; e.g. '%post failed' which would happen
> here due to the redhat-lsb bug. I just give out a more useful message
> than '%post failed' which helps people to identify the problem.
%post MUST *NEVER* FAIL!!!
The mandatory (MUST) guideline is that
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>> Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
>> module
>> instead of via subprocess.
>>
>> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/easy-karma-yum.patch
>
> Thank yo
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>>http://tuju.fi/fedora/11/kab-20100304.png
>>
>> looks like that some icons are also missing, but hard to judge
>> as it wont start properly to interact with user.
>
> That's the problem of not running Akonadi -
James Laska wrote:
> Representatives from Fedora QA, Rel-Eng and Development met on IRC to
> review determine whether the Fedora 13 Alpha release criteria [1] have
> been met. The team agreed that the Alpha criteria have been met, and to
> proceed with releasing F-13-Alpha-RC4.
Oh, because a KDE
Noriko Mizumoto wrote:
> This is kind reminder asking you to rebuild your package with latest
> translation. Localization team has been translating for updated and/or
> newly added strings since the String is frozen (2010-02-09). To allow
> translators to review and correct their latest translation
Kevin Kofler writes:
>> %post can give out something; e.g. '%post failed' which would happen
>> here due to the redhat-lsb bug. I just give out a more useful message
>> than '%post failed' which helps people to identify the problem.
>
> %post MUST *NEVER* FAIL!!!
that's why it executes a workar
Compose started at Thu Mar 4 08:15:15 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires libxerces-c.so.28
easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5
emotion-0.1.0.042-5.fc12
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-File-DirCompare:
75b150e32d5d9bd120e32c7e2ee01125 File-DirCompare-0.6.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.or
Author: eseyman
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-File-DirCompare/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4060
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-File-DirCompare.spec sources
Log Message:
Update to 0.6
Index: .cvsignore
==
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Perhaps this could be added into fedora-packager?
Well, it's useful also for testers (or even just users) who are not
packagers, so I'm not sure that's the best place.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Enrico Scholz wrote:
>> %post can give out something; e.g. '%post failed' which would happen
>> here due to the redhat-lsb bug. I just give out a more useful message
>> than '%post failed' which helps people to identify the problem.
>
> %post MUST *NEVER*
On 4 March 2010 13:17, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> But of course the GNOME spin "works" (for some definition of "works", they
> also have a PackageKit issue which was declared not a blocker –
For the record, it is a yum-langpacks issue.
If you're running an up to date gnome-packagekit you get a nice
m
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> My desktop gui processes leak enough mem that I need to restart
> couple times a week or system will run out of memory. Today
> I started with updating the F11 with yum. During the update,
> I noticed that it's pulling in the kde-4.4.0, scary. Then reboot.
[snip]
> KDE SIG, y
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 4 March 2010 13:17, Kevin Kofler wrote:
But of course the GNOME spin "works" (for some definition of "works", they
also have a PackageKit issue which was declared not a blocker –
For the record, it is a yum-langpacks issue.
If you're running an
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Whether it would be a separate backports repo or merely some more
> conservativeness in our update stream
FWIW, for stuff like KDE, if we don't allow new feature upgrades even in the
current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an unofficial
one will no
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
> module
> instead of via subprocess.
>
> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/easy-karma-yum.patch
There is now a git repo and your patch is included:
http:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. "previous stable",
> KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that proposal.
How i read it, you would still push *one* feature release in the
middle of stable release lifespan, r
Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Kevin Kofler writes:
>> The mandatory (MUST) guideline is that %post MUST NOT OUTPUT anything
>
> this means only output like license agreements, but not diagnostic
> output on stderr
No, diagnostic output is also not allowed, especially not when the failure
is not going
On 03/04/2010 05:21 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 12:07 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>>> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>>
>> I've done some updates, and now rpmlint reports:
>>
>> argyllcms.spec: W: no-c
Once upon a time, Hans de Goede said:
> I think the whole "stable update cycle" versus "semi-rolling update style" is
> too black and white. For core packages / major desktop packages clearly a
> "stable update cycle" is the right thing to do.
Well, but reading this thread, it obviously isn't "cl
Kevin Kofler writes:
>>> The mandatory (MUST) guideline is that %post MUST NOT OUTPUT anything
>>
>> this means only output like license agreements, but not diagnostic
>> output on stderr
>
> No, diagnostic output is also not allowed,
from where do you have this information?
> especially not
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Math-Pari:
27f5999671fe2a29cfd2e8c8a1f9308e Math-Pari-2.01080604.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mai
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> The funny part is that Akonadi is still very much a work in
> progress. I've tried to get it working many times without success.
> That's the reason majority still uses those plain resources.
Uh, Akonadi is now always used for contacts as of KDE 4.4.
> Few days back I asked
On 03/04/2010 07:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
> official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users are
> having with KDE 4.4 are unfortunate. This particular Akonadi issue hasn't
> shown up during testing or i
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an unofficial
> one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo will pick up
> that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable would probably be revived, currently
> it's mostly empty for F
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> How that's going to solve anything as upstream *intentionally* pushes
> stuff into it to break things?
Nobody intentionally BREAKS things. Upstream KDE releases are supposed to be
backwards compatible, data migration is something which is taken care of.
For example, Nepomuk
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Tom \spot\ Callaway wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 05:21 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> On 03/04/2010 12:07 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>>> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>>>
>>> I've done some updates,
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:01:29 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. "previous
> > stable", KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that
> > proposal.
>
> How i read it, you would still push
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an unofficial
>> one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo will pick up
>> that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable would p
On 03/04/2010 09:35 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Speaking of these... what about getting rid of %clean too? Automatic
> %clean is only added in F >= 13 currently, but the patch is small and
> could be easily backported to F11-12 too (I mean, a 7-line patch couldn't
> possibly break anything righ
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
> >> unofficial
> >> one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo will
Author: pghmcfc
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Math-Pari/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15962
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Math-Pari.spec sources
Log Message:
Update to 2.01080604
Index: .cvsignore
==
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
> > unofficial one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo
> > will pick up that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable wo
I don't know if this has already been raised but I notice on the
package-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org list that several Fedora 13
packages keep getting announced, for example, by checking the archives I
see that fedora-release-13-0.6 has been announced 6 times in March and a
further 7 times
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Enrico Scholz wrote:
[ two year tor insanity ]
It's been two years. I'm done with this discussion. I'm not spending more
time on the "tor-enrico" pacakge.
Paul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
M A Young wrote:
> I don't know if this has already been raised but I notice on the
> package-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org list that several Fedora 13
> packages keep getting announced, for example, by checking the archives I
> see that fedora-release-13-0.6 has been announced 6 times in Mar
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Thomas Janssen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> >> current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
>> >> unofficial
>> >> one
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> > current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
>> > unofficial one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial r
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:58:32 Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> >> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> > current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
> >> >
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 08:54:28AM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>M A Young wrote:
>> I don't know if this has already been raised but I notice on the
>> package-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org list that several Fedora 13
>> packages keep getting announced, for example, by checking the archives I
>>
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>> Go ahead, make that to your kde-hardcore-followers-repo. In my
>> understanding, that's what it has been for past years already
>> anyway.
>
> Third party repos are highway to hell unfortunately.
Quite interesting statement from the KDE SIG who runs
Dear all,
i hope this is the right place.
I am looking for a developer who can create personalized modifications to the
passsync DLL, specifically we need to have a function that matches the password
complexity against the DS ( and another LDAP ) and then reports back whether
the complexity is
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> I would argue having this within Fedora infrastructure would be better as
>> it would prevent proliferation of third-party repos replacing Fedora
>> packages and the resulting compatibility issues (see e.g. the chaos we're
>> having f
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> will pick up that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable would probably be
> revived, currently it's mostly empty for Fedora as the kind of stuff
> which would be in there is usually just pushed as official Fedora
> updates).
Go ah
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>> Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
>> module
>> instead of via subprocess.
>>
>> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/easy-karma-yum.patch
>
> There is
Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) said:
> A less ugly script can now be found here:
> http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/easy-karma.py
> Improvements:
> - display update details, e.g. bugs and notes
> - use src.rpm to find matching update
> - skip updates that have already been commented
>
> With th
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Upstream has no policy about what kind of releases are to be provided as
> updates, this is a distribution decision.
They add features to own releases just for that reason, so
downstreams and users could avoid such mess that has just happened.
If you d
Soeren Malchow wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> i hope this is the right place.
>
> I am looking for a developer who can create personalized modifications
> to the passsync DLL, specifically we need to have a function that
> matches the password complexity against the DS ( and another LDAP )
> and then re
Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. "previous
>> stable", KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that
>> proposal.
>
> How i read it, you would still push *one* feature release in the
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> That's why nobody can't enjoy the upstream's intended stability in bugfix
>> releases and plan major upgrades.
>
> You keep saying that, yet you have provided no evidence of such a stance
> from upstream. KDE upstream actually has no policy on what ver
Dear Rich,
the Problem is, that there is a second SSO system involved that also needs to
be checked, and we were thinking that we can utilize the passsync DLL as well
for that.
the logic for checking the other system is already available and only needs to
be implemented into the 64bit ready pa
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 08:05 +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:27:47PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> > > connect online
> > >
> >
Mike McGrath wrote:
> Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
> caused this week by the updates they released. Even an "I'm sorry I broke
> your desktop" would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
> happened on a pretty vanilla install, I suspect lots of
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:26:17AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> >
> >> Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
> >> module
> >> instead of via subprocess
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
> > caused this week by the updates they released. Even an "I'm sorry I broke
> > your desktop" would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
> > happen
On 03/04/2010 07:18 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 07:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>> That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
>> official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users are
>> having with KDE 4.4 are unfortunate. This particular Ak
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:26:17AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:23:30AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>>
Great script here's a small set of changes to have easy-karma use yum as a
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:36:53PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> small nit: if a single update has, say, three packages in it, the script
> presents it for your feedback three times.
This is fixed in the current git release.
Regards
Till
pgp1JcxH9MT6j.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel
Compose started at Thu Mar 4 09:15:19 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires libxerces-c.so.28
doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1
easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires lib
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 02:40:38PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Perhaps this could be added into fedora-packager?
>
> Well, it's useful also for testers (or even just users) who are not
> packagers, so I'm not sure that's the best place.
I am more in favor of packaging by
On Thursday 04 March 2010 17:33:20 Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 07:18 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/04/2010 07:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
> >> official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users
Mike McGrath wrote:
> Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
> caused this week by the updates they released. Even an "I'm sorry I broke
> your desktop" would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
> happened on a pretty vanilla install, I suspect lots of u
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:50:21 +0530
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
(adding linux-usb to cc:, see below)
> Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> connect online
>
> http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and.html
>
> Any opposition to add
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:34:20AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> Where is the module 'fedora_cert' packaged? I can't seem to find it.
It is in fedora-packager-0.4.0-1.fc12 from updates-testing.
Regards
Till
pgp7Sganx4A6n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproj
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> a) how users are supposed to consume those bugfix releases only,
> when you push feature release in the middle of working week?
What bugfix releases would we be supposed to push? There are no further
4.3.x releases.
> b) why those different releases exist in the first p
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
> > caused this week by the updates they released. Even an "I'm sorry I broke
> > your desktop" would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
> > happen
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 09:44 -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:50:21 +0530
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> (adding linux-usb to cc:, see below)
>
> > Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> > connect online
> >
> > http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/0
On Thursday 04 March 2010, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 05:21 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > On 03/04/2010 12:07 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> >> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> >>> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
> >> I've done some up
On 03/04/2010 10:08 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>
> That's the problem - it's just postponed to upgrade from update - you can
> choose one hell from 1. break update, 2. break upgrade. None of this should
> happen.
>
It has already happened and it will happen again and again and no amount
of i
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 16:20, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
>
>> Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
>> caused this week by the updates they released. Even an "I'm sorry I broke
>> your desktop" would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
>>
On 03/04/2010 11:28 PM, John5342 wrote:
>
> In my opinion most of fesco has lost it's mind even contemplating the
> recent suggestions. Please don't destroy one of Fedora's greatest
> strengths for the sake of some morons who want Fedora to be RedHat
> with a different colored hat... I am getting f
Author: mitr
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-IPTables-ChainMgr/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17158
Modified Files:
perl-IPTables-ChainMgr.spec
Log Message:
- Drop no longer required references to BuildRoot
Index: perl-IPTables-ChainMgr.spec
=
Author: mitr
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-IPTables-Parse/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17256
Modified Files:
perl-IPTables-Parse.spec
Log Message:
Drop no longer required references to BuildRoot
Index: perl-IPTables-Parse.spec
Author: mitr
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-Ping-External/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17413
Modified Files:
perl-Net-Ping-External.spec
Log Message:
Drop no longer required references to BuildRoot
Index: perl-Net-Ping-External.spec
===
Author: mitr
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-RawIP/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19442
Modified Files:
perl-Net-RawIP.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Mar 4 2010 Miloslav Trmač - 0.25-4
- Filter out bogus Provides: RawIP.so
- Drop no longer required references to
On 03/04/2010 10:15 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> > In other words, SIG's current policy is doing more harm than good
>> > for Fedora.
> Not necessarily. There has also been some very positive feedback for the KDE
> 4.4 updates, and some people are using Fedora BECAUSE such updates get
> pushed.
>
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> James Laska wrote:
> > Representatives from Fedora QA, Rel-Eng and Development met on IRC to
> > review determine whether the Fedora 13 Alpha release criteria [1] have
> > been met. The team agreed that the Alpha criteria have been met, and
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:57 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Whether it would be a separate backports repo or merely some more
> > conservativeness in our update stream
>
> FWIW, for stuff like KDE, if we don't allow new feature upgrades even in the
> current stable release
John5342 wrote:
> A simple way to encourage constructive input from users on both the
> state of play and providing more bug reports might be to regularly
> (perhaps even daily as soon as a significant update comes along) to
> post a list of all the bugs that are reported against the updates
> (bot
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> So please, Fedora KDE users - comment
> these changes!
I prefer to get the releases as KDE releases
them, instead of having to wait... and wait...
and wait...
I scanned the Stability Proposal document that
had been linked. Here is what I think:
As I had expected, b
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:47:28AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > On one hand we have people complaining about the quality of updates, on the
> > other hand we're happily releasing crap we know is broken.
>
> It's an *alpha*. 'Crap we kn
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 10:47 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > James Laska wrote:
> > > Representatives from Fedora QA, Rel-Eng and Development met on IRC to
> > > review determine whether the Fedora 13 Alpha release criteria [1] have
> > > be
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:22 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:47:28AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > On one hand we have people complaining about the quality of updates, on
> > > the
> > > other hand we're ha
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:00:12 -0800
Dan Williams wrote:
> The problem is that there are a ton more devices that need modeswitching
> than just Huawei, and upstream USB developers are refusing to take
> patches that add more devices to the kernel modeswitching code because
> they assert it should b
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
