On Wednesday 31 March 2010 01:56:56 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> > I don't think there's ever an absolute answer to this question.
> > Sometimes it makes more sense for the original reporter to report
> > upstream - in which case the maintainer s
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 04:26:12 Linuxguy123 wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 13:09 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > I am irritated by the way the KDE SIG and the KDE bugzappers handle
> > bugs. For most bugs that are reported they demand the reporter to file
> > an upstream bug report at bugs.
On 31 March 2010 08:28, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> So please - start reporting again - I hope I explained what does "UPSTREAM"
> resolution mean. I can't promise you, we (Fedora, KDE SIG, KDE upstream or
> whoever) fix the bug but...
>
I had a bug some time ago in Okular that I reported and was to
On 03/31/2010 07:34 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> Then let me put it more bluntly: To a Fedora release's user, both tags
> are a slap into the face of "reporter" and mean "your bug will not be
> fixed".
>
So, I get a minor bug report not worth pushing an update for in the
general releases but
2010/3/31 Stephen John Smoogen :
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 03/31/2010 01:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 14:20 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
As a user, having been hit by a bug, "CLOSED UPSTREAM" is nothing but a
cheap bold
On 31/03/10 09:44, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 07:34 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>> Then let me put it more bluntly: To a Fedora release's user, both tags
>> are a slap into the face of "reporter" and mean "your bug will not be
>> fixed".
>>
>
> So, I get a minor bug report not worth pus
On 03/31/2010 02:38 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
> Then ask the user Could you try "yum --enablerepo=rawhide update foo"
>
>From Fedora 13 onwards, this repo is not even installed by default
because users quite often used to enable this accidentally and had to
reinstall their systems.
> I know it
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Linuxguy123 wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 13:09 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>> I am irritated by the way the KDE SIG and the KDE bugzappers handle
>> bugs. For most bugs that are reported they demand the reporter to file
>> an upstream bug report at bugs.kde.org and set
On 03/31/2010 10:44 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 07:34 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>> Then let me put it more bluntly: To a Fedora release's user, both tags
>> are a slap into the face of "reporter" and mean "your bug will not be
>> fixed".
>>
>
> So, I get a minor bug report not wort
On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>
> If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
> close it "WONTFIX" and add a comment.
Why do you advocate WONTFIX over FIXED RAWHIDE? The latter seems the
more accurate status considering that I did fix it in Rawhide.
Rahu
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:21, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>> 8. The package updated sucessfully, but was not used intentionally. No
>> breakage noticed.
>>
>> This shows, that at least on the test machine, there are no broken deps,
>> conflicts or
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 16:48:06 -0700,
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> If you're on f13, you can install mesa-dri-drivers-experimental and try
>> it. If it breaks you get to keep both pieces :)
>
> Please update us on when he is ready for
On 31/03/10 10:10, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 02:38 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Then ask the user Could you try "yum --enablerepo=rawhide update foo"
>>
>
>> From Fedora 13 onwards, this repo is not even installed by default
which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:37:33AM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:21, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> >> 8. The package updated sucessfully, but was not used intentionally. No
> >> breakage noticed.
> >>
> >> This shows, t
Hello all,
I'm reviewing the package "NanoEngineer-1". The package seems to be
clean, but unfortunately it crashes on my computer when I try to run
it but not on the packager's computer. If anyone could figure out
what's going on, it would be very helpful -- I'm feeling bad about how
long this rev
On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
> which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
>
Not at all. Either the bug is important to fix in the current release
or it is not. Telling users to get it from Rawhide was never a valid
resolution. It is a workaround in some very
Sorry, used the wrong email address for CC'ing the packager ...
MEF
On 31 March 2010 11:30, Mary Ellen Foster wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm reviewing the package "NanoEngineer-1". The package seems to be
> clean, but unfortunately it crashes on my computer when I try to run
> it but not on the pac
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> > which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
>
> Not at all. Either the bug is important to fix in the current release
> or it is not. Telling users to get it from Rawhide w
On 31/03/10 11:50, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>>> which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
>>
>> Not at all. Either the bug is important to fix in the current release
>> or it
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:50:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> > > which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
> >
> > Not at all. Either the bug is important to fix in the cu
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
Till Maas wrote:
> Even
> if an update is there to fix something, it does not mean that one can or
> will test it completely (special hardware might be required). In this
> case it is still interesting to know, whether it installs cleanly or
> not. And testing whether it updates cleanly can still b
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:13:18PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > Even
> > if an update is there to fix something, it does not mean that one can or
> > will test it completely (special hardware might be required). In this
> > case it is still interesting to know, whether it inst
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:57:30 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:50:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> > > > which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:55:58 Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 31/03/10 11:50, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> >>> which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
> >>
> >> Not at all.
On 31/03/10 12:25, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:55:58 Frank Murphy wrote:
>> On 31/03/10 11:50, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> which will make fixing bugs in curren
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 13:32:24 Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 31/03/10 12:25, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:55:58 Frank Murphy wrote:
> >> On 31/03/10 11:50, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 03:45 P
On 03/31/2010 11:32 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>>
>> If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
>> close it "WONTFIX" and add a comment.
>
> Why do you advocate WONTFIX over FIXED RAWHIDE?
Because it is how s user perceives
On 03/31/2010 05:50 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 11:32 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
>>> close it "WONTFIX" and add a comment.
>>
>> Why do you advocate WONTFIX
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 14:20:40 Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 11:32 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
> >> close it "WONTFIX" and add a comment.
> >
> > Why do you advocat
On 03/31/2010 02:28 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 05:50 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>> On 03/31/2010 11:32 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
>
On 03/31/2010 06:11 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> Well this is what I call "cheating the user" and "maintainer lying at
> themselves about their package's state" and why I consider "FIXED
> RAWHIDE" to be non-helpful.
>
> The maintainer did not fix the bug a "reporter" filed, but left it
> unres
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-ORLite:
b35d8820cc4f4e367fdfe8f1c86ae029 ORLite-1.42.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/mailman/listinf
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-ORLite/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv5359
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-ORLite.spec sources
Log Message:
* Wed Mar 31 2010 Marcela Mašláňová 1.42-1
- update
Index: .cvsignore
=
On 31/03/10 13:34, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010 14:20:40 Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 03/31/2010 11:32 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
close it "WONTFIX" a
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-InferConfig/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17313
Modified Files:
perl-ExtUtils-InferConfig.spec
Log Message:
* Wed Mar 31 2010 Marcela Mašláňová 1.03-6
- 564836 remove one of tests
Index: perl-ExtUt
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-InferConfig/F-13
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17877
Modified Files:
perl-ExtUtils-InferConfig.spec
Log Message:
* Wed Mar 31 2010 Marcela Mašláňová 1.03-6
- 564836 remove one of tests
Index: perl-ExtUti
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564836
Marcela Mašláňová changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:49 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> That's just your perception and I don't see any consensus on that. The
> bug is fixed and fixed only in the development branch and this is a
> fairly common thing to do for upstream projects as well as
> distributions. because the fix is to
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> Unfortunately our ticketing tool doesn't do a great job at this, as we
> can't take one ticket and mark multiple release branches it affects
> and which of those release branches the fix is provided.
that's why there is 'clone' functionality. Use it.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> that's why there is 'clone' functionality. Use it.
Are you saying that we should all clone every report that we all would
normally close as fixed rawhide?
-jef
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 07:15:30PM +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > Unfortunately our ticketing tool doesn't do a great job at this, as we
> > can't take one ticket and mark multiple release branches it affects
> > and which of those release branches t
Yes, it’s here again, the April Fools’ Day [1]! If you don’t have your
own plans already, let me propose one for you – participate on the
ABRT test day!
ABRT is a tool that helps reporting program crashes with a few simple
mouse clicks. It is a significant part of Fedora operating system and
its
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> Are you saying that we should all clone every report that we all would
> normally close as fixed rawhide?
Are you saying, that everyone facing that bug, should search from
every release if that has been handled somewhere else other than the
product i
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>>
>> Are you saying that we should all clone every report that we all would
>> normally close as fixed rawhide?
>
> Are you saying, that everyone facing that bug, should search from every
> relea
On Wednesday 31 March 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:44 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:36:29AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Nvidia has announced that they are deprecating it
> > >
> > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/ar
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> No. I'm asking for you to clarify that you feel clone is appropriate
> for wide spread use for the specific situation I'm commenting on. We
> are very much stuck in a trap of designing our workflow to fit the
> tools we have, instead of designing our t
Compose started at Wed Mar 31 08:15:12 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
emotion-0.1.0.042-5.fc12.i686 requires libecore_job.so.0
emotion-0.1.0.042-5.fc12.i686 requires libevas.so.0
emotion-0.1.0.042-5.fc12.i686 require
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 15:02 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 02:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> >
> > If your "unworthy bug" doesn't cause malfunctions, you could easily
> > close it "WONTFIX" and add a comment.
>
> Why do you advocate WONTFIX over FIXED RAWHIDE? The latter seems t
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:15 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > Unfortunately our ticketing tool doesn't do a great job at this, as we
> > can't take one ticket and mark multiple release branches it affects
> > and which of those release branches the fix is
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 09:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> I'm asking for a sketch of a policy that would do better at accurately
> portraying what deficiencies are alive while still allowing
> maintainers to efficiently track which issues they've resolved to
> their satisfaction.
I've thought abou
On 04/01/2010 12:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> An alternative is to change the version to Rawhide and then you can use
> CLOSED RAWHIDE. You should usually have the reporter's agreement before
> doing this, though.
>
> Once again I note that Launchpad handles this noticeably better than
> Bugzi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561568
Brian changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 20:58 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 March 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:44 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:36:29AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Nvidia has announced that t
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 00:45 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 04/01/2010 12:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > An alternative is to change the version to Rawhide and then you can use
> > CLOSED RAWHIDE. You should usually have the reporter's agreement before
> > doing this, though.
> >
> > Once
On 04/01/2010 12:59 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> As I said in another mail, Launchpad isn't better in all respects, it's
> not a simple decision. Also, currently Bugzilla is shared with Red Hat
> and hence benefits from management by dkl and other RH staff;
On the other hand, none of the bugzill
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:29:26PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It'd be nice to have better handling for this in a future Bugzilla
> release, but I think it might require considerable internal changes,
> though I'm not an expert; it doesn't strike me as something simple to
> patch in.
Maybe it
Till Maas wrote:
> Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
> e.g. using a flag for each supported release or some Whiteboard
> Keywords, and then implement another Bugzilla Frontend that uses the
> XML-RPC interface of Bugzilla to provide a Frontend that can be better
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 14:56 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
> > e.g. using a flag for each supported release or some Whiteboard
> > Keywords, and then implement another Bugzilla Frontend that uses the
>
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 01:12 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> I would suggest proposing those changes you have in mind to dkl, There
> is a internal bugzilla list.
The problem is this isn't an area where I can be terribly constructive;
I can point at the problem but I've nothing to offer in the way
Compose started at Wed Mar 31 09:15:06 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
gnome-web-photo-0.9-4.fc13.i686 requires gecko-libs = 0:1.9.2.1
hornsey-1.5.2-0.1.fc13.i686 requires libclutter-gst-0.10.so.0
libnodeupdown-backen
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 19:15:30 +0300 (EEST), Juha wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > Unfortunately our ticketing tool doesn't do a great job at this, as we
> > can't take one ticket and mark multiple release branches it affects
> > and which of those release branches the fix
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Why would I want to clone a bz ticket if I did not want to fix the
> bug in anything other than Rawhide?
Because it's a database of release's bugs, not a todo list?
I could be wrong of course, please correct me if I am. Considering
that existing
Greetings,
Fedora 13 Beta RC#3 is available for testing. Release candidate #3
includes a fix for F13Beta blocker bug#578391. Please refer to the
summary sent earlier by Hurry for test focus areas [1]. If you are
interested in providing feedback against the Beta release criteria [2],
please cont
On 2010/03/31 21:47 (GMT+0200) Till Maas composed:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:29:26PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> It'd be nice to have better handling for this in a future Bugzilla
>> release, but I think it might require considerable internal changes,
>> though I'm not an expert; it doesn
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> Because it's a database of release's bugs, not a todo list?
Bugzilla has multiple uses. The upstream project goes to some length
describing it as a flexible tool. We in fact use it for multiple
purposes. We use it for package review tickets
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:30:08 +0300 (EEST), Juha wrote:
> > Why would I want to clone a bz ticket if I did not want to fix the
> > bug in anything other than Rawhide?
>
> Because it's a database of release's bugs, not a todo list?
Is that an answer or a question?
Anyone who wants to search the d
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:09:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 14:56 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> > Till Maas wrote:
> > > Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
> > > e.g. using a flag for each supported release or some Whiteboard
>
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 16:54 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> Bugzilla is OSS. Those with the talent and inclination to do so could try
> lending a hand to existing efforts to improve branch/release handling:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55970
>
> I found that bug quickly by searching
Juha Tuomala wrote:
> They've modified the bugzilla way too much and thus logged in users
> cannot for example change version or component which causes that
> there is way too much of entries that would need some kind of manual
> work and they lack the manpower to do that.
>[...]
> They do give the
On 3/31/2010 14:18, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 09:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>> I'm asking for a sketch of a policy that would do better at accurately
>> portraying what deficiencies are alive while still allowing
>> maintainers to efficiently track which issues they've resol
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:31 -0500, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> On 3/31/2010 14:18, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 09:07 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> >> I'm asking for a sketch of a policy that would do better at accurately
> >> portraying what deficiencies are alive while still all
Greetings,
Representatives from Fedora QA, Rel-Eng and Development met on IRC to
review whether the Fedora 13 Beta release criteria [1] have been met.
The team agreed that the Beta criteria have not been met, and to slip in
the F-13 schedule by one week. For additional details, please refer to
th
Despite a heroic effort by developers and testers, we have not been able
to reach Beta release criteria by the time of the Go / No Go meeting.
There are still unresolved bugs and unknown test results. Because of
this we've enacted a 1 week slip of the Beta release date. This does
not mean we will
On 3/31/2010 2:53 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> No one has so far defined a workflow that requires an accurate audit
> of active deficiencies in any release. Closing bugs fixed rawhide
> certainly cause some annoyances because closed bugs are marginally
> harder to search for (because you have to requ
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> This is why I actually really enjoyed the brief period that bugzilla
> automatically searched closed bugs, though I can see why that isn't
> sustainable. Perhaps it could automatically search closed bugs for
> supported releases?
Or perha
76 matches
Mail list logo
