Hi,
On 03/05/2010 06:56 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 03/05/2010 02:52 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> One size does still not fit all, although this is a great idea for
>> most packages in Fedora for packages in certain niches this is a bad idea.
>>
>> I've said this before (and got 0 response), I bel
Hi,
On 03/05/2010 06:32 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:52:56AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Make rawhide consumable as a semi-rolling release itself.
>>
>> We already have this it is called early branching of the next release. I
>> would fully agree with you if it were
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:39:02PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 23:47 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > to how these numbers have changed in a week. I hope then everyone from
> > the QA SIG is using the script to report feedback, so it will be save to
> > say that an update was
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:42:28PM -0500, Tony Nelson wrote:
> On 10-03-05 17:00:12, Till Maas wrote:
> ...
> > But it seems that os.getlogin() is too smart for this purposes, e.g.
> > for me it always uses the username that started X, even if I "su -"
> > or "sudo -i" into another account.
>
>
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:18:37PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:32AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Imho for the beginning, there is no need to be able to query complete
> > profiles, but it would be enough to have a count p
On 06/03/10 09:04, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:18:37PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:32AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
>>> Imho for the beginning, there is no need to be able to query complete
>>> profiles,
Hi,
I've imported monodevelop-debugger-gdb for f13 and rawhide and have
tried to build it. Koji is going through the setup, but then falling
over on the build. Looking at the logs, it looks like a python
problem...
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034431&name=build.log
Can any
On 03/06/2010 11:35 AM, Paul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've imported monodevelop-debugger-gdb for f13 and rawhide and have
> tried to build it. Koji is going through the setup, but then falling
> over on the build. Looking at the logs, it looks like a python
> problem...
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/ko
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:34:08AM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 06/03/10 09:04, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:18:37PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:32AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> >>> Imho for
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > Also a link to an example spec would be helpful.
The fedora-easy-karma.spec now uses this, so in case anyone else is
interested to test it, it can be used.
But I needed some patc
On 06/03/10 10:04, Till Maas wrote:
--snipped--
> DB)
> 3) once a day a crawler reads all files and counts for each package how
> often they are installed,
>>
>> What about uninstalled?
>>
>> Update bring in upd to X, but package Y,Z. come in.
>> User removes Y,Z without breaking anythi
make tag TAG_OPTS=-F
make build
在2010-03-06?17:35:55，Paul??写道：
>Hi,
>
>I've?imported?monodevelop-debugger-gdb?for?f13?and?rawhide?and?have
>tried?to?build?it.?Koji?is?going?through?the?setup,?but?then?falling
>over?on?the?build.?Looking?at?the?logs,?it?looks?like?a?python
>problem...
>
>http
On 03/05/2010 06:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 05:10:41PM +, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> I suspect that the Fedora policy, as stated, makes the most sense for
>> most people who use Fedora. There is no rule against pushing new
>> package releases to updates, but they're
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:19:27AM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 06/03/10 10:04, Till Maas wrote:
> --snipped--
> > DB)
> > 3) once a day a crawler reads all files and counts for each package how
> > often they are installed,
> >>
> >> What about uninstalled?
> >>
> >> Update bring in
I am trying to build a package on F13, and got a gcc internal error:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791
I have no idea how to proceed
The package builds just fine on F12, F11 and F10.
--
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorapr
What shows the build.log?
-- J
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 10:20 -0300 schrieb Paulo Cavalcanti:
> I am trying to build a package on F13, and got a gcc internal error:
>
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791
>
>
> I have no idea how to proceed
>
> The package bu
Paulo Cavalcanti writes:
« HTML content follows »
I am trying to build a package on F13, and got a gcc internal error:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791>http://koji
.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791
I have no idea how to proceed
Create a bug ag
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 08:44:13AM -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Paulo Cavalcanti writes:
>
> >« HTML content follows »
> >I am trying to build a package on F13, and got a gcc internal error:
> >
> >
> >http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791>http://koji
> >.fedoraproject.org/
Compose started at Sat Mar 6 08:15:05 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
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
> I am trying to build a package on F13, and got a gcc internal error:
>
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2034791
>
>
> I have no idea how to proceed
>
> The package builds just fine on F12, F11 and F10.
>
>
The
While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
* Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
* Useless update description "update to 4.7.1".
* And *of course* it was push
Hi,
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
> * Useless update description "update to 4
Am Freitag, den 05.03.2010, 19:22 +0100 schrieb Christoph Höger:
> Hi all,
>
> I am currently writing an IMAP client script in perl.
>
> Since this script will only be used in one single use case and the IMAP
> server supports Kerberos authentication, I thought it would be a good
> idea to use M
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> Hi,
>
> 2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> > While we are at it, here is another great update:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
> >
> > * New version introduced in F11.
> > * Doesn't fix any
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
> with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Regards
Till
pgpdxHb1B1LoX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.f
Following the previous thread on opencv:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-February/131584.html
Almost all packages have been rebuilt against opencv-2.0.0-7 (thank you,
guys !) except mrpt.
We didn't get any news from mrpt only maintainer jlblanco and most
packages have been pus
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
>
> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
> desktop)
I think for many people the issue is not that it can be an update (maybe the
enhancements etc are useful to someone).
On 03/06/2010 11:28 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
>
>> maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
>> with an official policy.
>>
> Did the mc update break something?
>
Even if it did not it would be
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
>> > While we are at it, here is another great update:
>> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>> >
>> > * New version introduce
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
>
>
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
>>
>> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
>> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
>> desktop)
>
> I think for many people the issue is not that it can be an update (maybe the
> enha
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:36 AM, Rajeesh K Nambiar
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:29 AM, Peter Hutterer
> wrote:
>>> > Rajeesh K Nambiar wrote:
>>> >> Any pointers on how to migrate the 'enable touchpad tap-to-click'
>>> >> feature from the existing .fdi file(s)?
>>
>> Section "InputClass"
>
I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone loves those,
right?
Here it is: http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=241710
I tried to present the
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:14:38AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:27 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs created prior to
> > adding "F13" to RedHat Bugzilla or the branching of F13, depending on
> > what happened later, are to
On 3/6/2010 9:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone loves those,
> right?
>
>
> What do people make of this?
>
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:03 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
> Following the previous thread on opencv:
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-February/131584.html
>
>
> Almost all packages have been rebuilt against opencv-2.0.0-7 (thank you,
> guys !) except mrpt.
> We didn't ge
Compose started at Sat Mar 6 09:15:12 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 Sat, 2010-03-06 at 21:12 +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
> On 3/6/2010 9:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> > about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> > controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyo
On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
[...]
> > Because I don't understand the
> > criteria for Fedora package update.
> >
> > Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
>
> Becaus
On 03/06/2010 11:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I tried to present the poll in a very neutral way, and as far as I know,
> it hasn't been linked to from anywhere else; only regular forum members
> are likely to come across it. So it shouldn't be massively inherently
> biased, and has a reasonable
On 03/07/2010 01:40 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> If that were the case, I'd have expected someone to bring it up in the
> comments. No-one has.
>
> I've never actually heard of anyone running FN-1 because they want a
> 'more stable' system; this thread was the first time I heard that
> theory. In
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:04:31 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
...snip...
> What do people make of this?
I'm no expert on polls/polling, but I suspect that many of the people
who are more interested in a 'stable/less updates' Fedora don't
frequent things like the forums or users list. Sure, they mig
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone loves those,
> right?
>
> Here it is: http://foru
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 03/05/2010 06:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 05:10:41PM +, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> Well, that's a rather specialized taste.
>
>> And since I was lost at the previous step, I wonder here what you
>> think Thomas
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone loves those,
> right?
>
> Here it is: http://forums.fedorafor
On 06/03/10 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 21:12 +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
>> On 3/6/2010 9:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
>>> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
>>> controver
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 15:00 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> I don't think people realize what they're asking for. I'll just defer to
> my favorite Ford quote:
>
> "If I had asked my customers what they wanted," Ford said, "they would
> have said a faster horse."
I don't think that's quite apt. The
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:30 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> I have seen some discussions, but I don't follow them. I'm waiting for
> results ;)
Get involved, try to influence the discussion.
> Pity. There are many Fedora policies that are useless for end users
> like me, but update poli
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
>> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
>> controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone l
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 21:10 +0100 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann'
Mierzejewski:
> On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> [...]
> > > Because I don't understand the
> > > criteria for Fedora package updat
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> >
[snipped]
> > PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
> > there are many users who dislike Ubuntu because bugs are not fixed and they
> > have to live with them far too
Good news everyone,
you can probably expect to receive more positive bodhi karma for your
updates in the future (or you already got unexpected much), because
there is now a script called 'fedora-easy-karma'[0], that makes
providing feedback a lot easier.
This makes it more important to consider t
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
> versions to F11.
>
Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
And I
On 03/07/2010 12:34 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Everyone loves those,
> right?
>
> Here it is: http://forums.fedora
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:16:45PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> > 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> > >
> [snipped]
> > > PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
> > > there are many users who dislik
As there are no objections I have added to "Sound and Video"
v4l2ucp in comps.xml for F12-F14,
ucview for F11-F14, EL5 (Robert Scheck replied that I can do it)
and gtk-v4l for F13-F14.
Alexey Kurov
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>
>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>> versions to F11.
>>
>
> Why? I don't want to update
But you are
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:30 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>
>> I have seen some discussions, but I don't follow them. I'm waiting for
>> results ;)
>
> Get involved, try to influence the discussion.
>
I'm just a guest here :)
I'm not a Fedora developer so m
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>>
>>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>>> versions to F11.
>>>
>>
>> W
On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>
>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>> versions to F11.
>>
>
> Why? I don't want to
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:40:20PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >>
> >> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> >> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pu
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>>
>>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in p
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:48:23AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> deal with the problems that might arise with the new version. But if the
> new version is dumped upon me in the middle of a week, I'm left without
> a choice. I have to immediately deal with whatever problems arise from
> the upgra
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
> components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
I hope that RHEL 6 will be released soon, Fedora 11 is going to be
On 03/07/2010 04:14 AM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> I'm just a guest here :)
>
> I'm not a Fedora developer so my vote doesn't really matter.
>
Getting involved does not require a vote and any user position if
expressed in a constructive fashion does matter and is part of how we
can form a decis
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>> components revision number .
>
> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
>
I understand that. However th
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> > But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
> > full system update?
> >
>
> Time. A simple "yum update" or make a selective update takes a few
> minutes. A whole system update takes m
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
> addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but generally it's bound to fail.
A security update in an application
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
>> > But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
>> > full system update?
>> >
>>
>> Time. A simple "yum update" or make a selective
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:28:32AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
> > addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
>
> I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases
Em Sáb, 2010-03-06 às 18:00 +0100, Christoph Wickert escreveu:
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
> * Usele
On 03/06/2010 03:15 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:04:31 -0800
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> ...snip...
>
>> What do people make of this?
>
> I'm no expert on polls/polling, but I suspect that many of the people
> who are more interested in a 'stable/less updates' Fedora don't
>
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 03:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:34 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I thought to myself yesterday, 'what this long and fractious thread
> > about update policy *really* needs is some unscientific and
> > controversial numbers'. =) So, I ran a forum poll! Ev
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:07:13PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Most of our packagers follow the guidelines from the wiki:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_guidelines
> This means, they apply at least three criteria:
> * An update should not break something
> * An upd
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:32:11PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> can be packaged. Another obvious TODO is to get bodhi_update_str()
> included in the bodhi client in fedora-python.
>
I'll be happy to take that patch.
Looking like I'll be pushing out an updated python-fedora next week.
Depending on th
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Moreover you also have the option of updating security fixes only.
That option doesn't really exist, as was already demonstrated:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/131926.html
Björn Persson
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed mess
On 6.3.2010 23:21, Till Maas wrote:
> Good news everyone,
>
> you can probably expect to receive more positive bodhi karma for your
> updates in the future (or you already got unexpected much), because
> there is now a script called 'fedora-easy-karma'[0], that makes
> providing feedback a lot easi
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
>>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>>> components revision number .
>>
>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
On Saturday 06 March 2010 03:50:22 pm Henrique Junior wrote:
> A few days ago the discussion on policy updates are maturing and that it
> is beneficial to Fedora, but it's useless to start threads with the
> attitude of "pointing fingers and accusing" using an ironic tone.
Agreed. Please stop star
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
>> addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
>
> I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
> but gener
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
>>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>>> in past 11 yea
> Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
Since you don't want to update every 6 months, you want people to keep
updating every now and then?
Cheers,
Debarshi
--
One reason that life is complex is that it has a real part and an
imaginary part.
-- Andrew Koenig
-
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
> plenty of time to adapt.
>
If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
big ev
2010/3/7 Rahul Sundaram :
> On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>
>
> If you have a large codebase two months is
On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
wrote:
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
> * Useless update descripti
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>
>
> If you have a l
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>
updates-testing should not be used for this purpose because among other
things you might want to push
>>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>>
>>
>> If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
>> big evaluating a move
>>
>
> Then make i
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>>
>
> updates-testing should not be used for thi
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>
>>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>>>
>>
>> updates-
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil:
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for tho
On 6 March 2010 02:50, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> We have various different definitions of the Alpha, it seems. The
>>> working definition that QA / rel-eng have always worked on when deciding
>>> whether to ship it is, br
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 01:49 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> Let's consider a situation - I'm developing a project in php 5.2. This
> project might work fine on php 5.3 - I don't know I didn't tested it
> yet. I'm depending on 5.2 version. Testing this code for a new php
> will take some ti
Added marketing in cc (probably better place for discussion).
Does it make sense to ship a small pdf (say having a title "Welcome to
Fedora") or if possible a video for users as an introduction to our
distribution ?
If yes, because it makes sense to keep it as small/simple as possible
what should
Hello all,
The first beta of the new PackageDB is running in our staging environment
now.
https://admin.stg.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/
All the features for 0.5.x should be present but there's definitely bugs to
be found in the implementation. When you across one, feel free to find me
on IRC to
On Sat 6 March 2010 5:54:11 pm Conrad Meyer wrote:
> All Fedora developers are people, too -- please remember to show
> some respect.
"Be excellent to eachother"
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Our_Community
--
Ryan Rix
== http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://rix.si/ ==
signa
95 matches
Mail list logo
