On 06/07/10 07:48, Gérard Milmeister wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 10:13 +0800, Chen Lei wrote:
>> Hi FESCo,
>>
>> Can we orphan his packages now? I'd like to take scons, I don't think
>> waiting more time will be helpful.
>
> Hi,
>
> I am still alive.
> I had always hoped to find the time to resu
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:21:29AM +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
> This seems to be happening a lot lately regarding maintainers and/or
> co-maintainers losing interest in their projects somewhere along the
> line and just stopping development without any warning and
> notification to other members wh
sorry for being offline. had some longer trouble in real life and am now
wading through lots of mails which piled up since some weeks.
pushed that package.
what is the correct way for being unavailable?
is a vacation message ok, or would we spam our mailinglists?
as far as i remember vacation wou
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Sven Lankes wrote:
>
> Maybe we could tweak the pkgdb in a way that a co-maintainer request
> would automatically be granted if it isn't answered within a long enough
> timeframe (say 8 weeks).
>
> That way packages with AWOL maintainers could grow co-maintainers
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:51:37AM +0200, josef radinger wrote:
> sorry for being offline. had some longer trouble in real life and am now
> wading through lots of mails which piled up since some weeks.
Welcome back.
> what is the correct way for being unavailable?
> is a vacation message ok, or
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 01:30:37PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> This generally works out pretty well, and helps out with the problem of
> having quite a small set of maintainers for an extremely large set of
> packages. I was often in the situation where I happened to notice a
> small issue w
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Sven Lankes wrote:
> Maybe we could tweak the pkgdb in a way that a co-maintainer request
> would automatically be granted if it isn't answered within a long enough
> timeframe (say 8 weeks).
>
> That way packages with AWOL maintainers could grow co-maint
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 09:56:50PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
> this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
> e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
> the open floor topic.
Is
> > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Sven Lankes wrote:
> >
> >
> > Maybe we could tweak the pkgdb in a way that a co-maintainer request
> > would automatically be granted if it isn't answered within a long enough
> > timeframe (say 8 weeks).
> >
> > That way packages with AWOL maintainers could
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 10:51 +0200, josef radinger wrote:
> sorry for being offline. had some longer trouble in real life and am
> now
> wading through lots of mails which piled up since some weeks.
>
Good to hear you are back :-)
Pierre
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 18:24 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> The Fedora Infrastructure issue tracker can be accessed here to report a
> problem:
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure
Thanks. Ticket opened there:
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2255
Connectivity is still
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:13:40AM +0800, Chen Lei wrote:
> 2010/6/18 Chen Lei :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Following the process
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
> >
> > Is someone able to get in touch with Gérard Milmeister.(gemi)
> >
> > I can't find a
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Sven Lankes wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:21:29AM +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
>
> > This seems to be happening a lot lately regarding maintainers and/or
> > co-maintainers losing interest in their projects somewhere along the
> > line and just stopping
Patrick MONNERAT writes:
> Connectivity is still VERY bad today.
FWIW, I had no problem cvs-importing a 16Mb glibc srpm about an hour
ago (from within the M-net network).
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"An
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 11:57 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> FWIW, I had no problem cvs-importing a 16Mb glibc srpm about an hour
> ago (from within the M-net network).
The problems I get (from Switzerland) seem to be connection-related
rather than data amount-related. I don't know how many times y
On 07/06/2010 01:20 PM, Patrick MONNERAT wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 11:57 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
>
>> FWIW, I had no problem cvs-importing a 16Mb glibc srpm about an hour
>> ago (from within the M-net network).
>>
> The problems I get (from Switzerland) seem to be connection-r
On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 08:37 +0100, Pierre-Yves wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 22:57 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > Is there any interest in helping me maintain and review these new R
> > packages in Fedora? The packages are already done, its just the
> > reviews
> > and upkeep that I'd need
Am Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:57:06 +0100
schrieb "Richard W.M. Jones" :
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Sven Lankes wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:21:29AM +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
> >
> > > This seems to be happening a lot lately regarding maintainers
> > > and/or co-maintainers losi
Sorry for the dumb question, but can you link me to a step by step
review process?
I'd like to do an 'internal review' if not a propper review.
Dan.
On 5 July 2010 12:25, Pierre-Yves wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 11:16 +0200, Pierre-Yves wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> If someone could have a look at thi
perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
perl-DBI-Dumper has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
On i386:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 03:28:31PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > I thought rawhide should be more useful and less broken if i recall
> > the latest threads right. Anyways, exactly that's why i do *not* want
> > anybody can do anything with any package. That's just insane, sorry.
>
> This is Fedor
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 01:26:21PM +0200, Thomas Spura wrote:
> If this is implemented, the 'next' co-maintainer should become the real
> maintainer after another 8 weeks non-commiting by the former maintainer.
I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
maintainer ("owne
Compose started at Tue Jul 6 08:15:06 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
BackupPC-3.1.0-14.fc14.noarch requires perl-suidperl
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requires libgladeui-1.so.9
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requir
I wonder about the maintainer ship of epiphany. The ownership of it is
gecko-maint but in none of the current versions of fedora is epiphany
gecko based and of the 18 other maintainers not a single person is on
the bugzilla watch ACL. There's a bug that was introduced at some
point in the F-13 time
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 01:39:43PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
> maintainer ("owner"?) and co-maintainers, rather than just having all
> co-maintainers be equal?
Because this ensures that there is a well defined person
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 11:23 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 09:56:50PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
> > this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
> > e-mail me directly, or bring it up
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 13:23 +0100, Dan Bolser wrote:
> Sorry for the dumb question, but can you link me to a step by step
> review process?
>
> I'd like to do an 'internal review' if not a propper review.
Hi Dan,
Indeed you will not be able to do an official review until you have been
approved a
Start End Name
Wed 26-May Tue 03-Aug Packaging and Development (precedes Alpha)
Tue 06-Jul Tue 06-Jul Feature Submission Deadline One Week away
Thu 08-Jul Thu 08-Jul Create Installable Images for QA testing #1
Tue 13-Jul Tue 13-Jul Custom Spins Submission Deadline
Tue 13-Jul
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Mamoru Tasaka
wrote:
> Colin Walters wrote, at 07/04/2010 03:23 AM +9:00:
>> Author: walters
>>
>> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/shared-mime-info/devel
>> In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv21405
>>
>> Modified Files:
>> shared-mime-info.spec
>>
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:43 +0100, Richard wrote:
> So I think it's valid for packages to have 0, 1, 2, or more
> maintainers.
Why 0? Who will be notified about bugzilla tickets? Who will receive
mail sent to the PACKAGE-owner Fedora e-mail alias?
For each package in the collection, there ought
Colin Walters wrote, at 07/06/2010 11:29 PM +9:00:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Mamoru Tasaka
> wrote:
>> Colin Walters wrote, at 07/04/2010 03:23 AM +9:00:
>>> Author: walters
>>>
>>> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/shared-mime-info/devel
>>> In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Mamoru Tasaka
wrote:
> > If you want to avoid potential dependency loop, it should be
> Requires(post).
Fixed, thank you!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:43 +0100, Richard wrote:
>
>> So I think it's valid for packages to have 0, 1, 2, or more
>> maintainers.
>
> Why 0? Who will be notified about bugzilla tickets? Who will receive
> mail sent to the PACKAGE-owner Fed
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:54:29AM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:43 +0100, Richard wrote:
> >
> >> So I think it's valid for packages to have 0, 1, 2, or more
> >> maintainers.
> >
> > Why 0? Who will be notified
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 12:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> [About automating this during the push process, it is possible to have
> a depchecker simulate a --skip-broken and exclude packages which break
> dependencies. There are different strategies. However, the procedure
> must be backed up by
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:34:25AM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> Once we're satisfied that depcheck does the right thing, we will
> probably set it up to start adding automatic +1 karma from 'autoqa' when
> updates pass the automated test suite (depcheck and possibly other tests
> - rpmlint, rpmguard
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 12:31:32PM +0300, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Sven Lankes wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe we could tweak the pkgdb in a way that a co-maintainer request
> > > would automatically be granted if it isn't answered within a long enough
> > >
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 09:56:50PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
> this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
> e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
> the open floor topic.
Ca
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 12:00:23PM -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> If anyone wants to help code this, I think the way to do it is to implement
> an events queue in pkgdb. With the queue we can do two things -- first,
> have the pkgdb send nagmail when an acl request has not been answered.
> secon
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:55:27 +0200
Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:33:04PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:48:43PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > > I have updated the page.
> > >
> > > Does it look clear now? Re-wording or tweaks very welcome.
> > >
>
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 09:21:29 +1000
Chris Jones wrote:
> This seems to be happening a lot lately regarding maintainers and/or
> co-maintainers losing interest in their projects somewhere along the
> line and just stopping development without any warning and
> notification to other members who may b
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:43 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 01:26:21PM +0200, Thomas Spura wrote:
> > If this is implemented, the 'next' co-maintainer should become the
> > real maintainer after another 8 weeks non-commiting by the former
> > maintainer.
>
> I think t
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 18:06:55 +0200
Till Maas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 09:56:50PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
> > this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
> > e-mail me directly, or bring it u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/6/10 2:16 AM, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> Maybe Fedora should do a transition to a more open system, since the dedicated
> packager is less present nowadays. But it should be done carefully, in order
> not to piss off the remaining dedicated packagers,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:34:25AM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
>
>> Once we're satisfied that depcheck does the right thing, we will
>> probably set it up to start adding automatic +1 karma from 'autoqa' when
>> upda
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hallo,
I will inform you, that I have taken the ownership of the
gnustep-make package.
Of course, co-maintainers may be welcome.
Best Regards:
Jochen Schmitt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with
There is an ongoing outage at this time in PHX2. The exact start time is
not yet known and the ETA to be fixed is not yet known.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2010-07-05 01:00'
Reason for outage:
Severa
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:34:25AM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> >
> >> Once we're satisfied that depcheck does the right thing, we will
> >> probably set it up to start adding automatic +1 karma
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:34:25AM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> I'll attempt to give a brief summary here. First you need to understand
> that there are three states for a package that has been built with the
> hope of being pushed as an update:
> * 'candidate': freshly-built packages intended for u
This email serves as the last reminder for the Fedora 14 Feature
Submission Deadline--Tuesday, July 13, 2010. After this date newly
submitted features will be targeted for Fedora 15 unless an exception is
granted by FESCo.
Accepted Fedora 14 features so far:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rel
I get this build failure trying to build vhostmd:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2298698
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=2298704&name=build.log
+ autoreconf
configure:11354: error: possibly undefined macro: AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FDdnl
If this token and others
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Gérard Milmeister wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 10:13 +0800, Chen Lei wrote:
>> Hi FESCo,
>>
>> Can we orphan his packages now? I'd like to take scons, I don't think
>> waiting more time will be helpful.
>
> Hi,
>
> I am still alive.
> I had always hoped to find th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/06/2010 10:21 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> Essentially using a different flag is just re-using the code used to
> flag a package as critpath-approved only with a different name.
> Therefore it should not need that much more effort.
critpath approved i
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > > IMHO it should not be a +1 karma but some different flag that is set for
> > > updates that passed the tests.
> >
> > Using karma is vi
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> Essentially using a different flag is just re-using the code used to
> flag a package as critpath-approved only with a different name.
> Therefore it should not need that much more effort.
>
> Btw. using the "path of least resistance" to imple
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 11:34 -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> If there are any other questions, feel free to ask.
>
> -w
Did you get to look at the nss-softokn situation (details of which I
sent to autoqa-devel) yet? How hard would it be to catch that?
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 17:27 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 12:34:59PM +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 01:32:16AM +0200, M
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 06.07.2010 19:42, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
> + autoreconf
> configure:11354: error: possibly undefined macro: AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FDdnl
> If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
> See the Autoconf documentatio
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=609600
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 3 of version 1.2.6. This release contains a couple of bug fixes.
***We need your help! Please help us test this software.*** It is a
Release Candidate release, so it may have a few glitches, but it has
been tested for reg
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 03:06:37PM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > > > IMHO it should not be a +1 karma but some different flag that is set
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:25:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 07/06/2010 10:21 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > Essentially using a different flag is just re-using the code used to
> > flag a package as critpath-approved only with a different name.
> > Therefore it should not need that much more effo
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:09:34PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 03:06:37PM -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > > > >
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:21 PM, seth vidal wrote:
>
> try to be excellent, please.
> -sv
Be excellent would be that guy to drop me a mail stating my package is
being updated to a new version. This is respect !
Similarly my package perl-perlilog is now part of RHEL-6, I haven't
got any email from
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 22:26 +0200, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:21 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> >
> > try to be excellent, please.
> > -sv
>
> Be excellent would be that guy to drop me a mail stating my package is
> being updated to a new version. This is respect !
>
> Similarly
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2010-07-06)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 19:30:01 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-07-06/fesco.2010-07-06-19.30.log.html
Meeting summary
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611850
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=429926&action=diff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=429926&action=edit
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-dev
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> One can quickly see that several (if not many) of them are due
> to orphans/retired packages in Fedora 12. And due to violated upgrade
> paths (e.g. compat-db):
That just proves that we should avoid retiring packages, but try to keep
them alive as long as we can, even if
Apparently[1] it is up to the desktop environment now to deactivate the LVDS
display if the laptop lid is closed at boot (or whenever?). I now have
several F13 laptops in docks with external monitors that boot with the lid
closed, but kdm_greet puts the login panel on the closed LVDS display (s
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> And there would be drawbacks, too, for a hardcoded "Req => BR" rule.
> It would make circular deps impossible: Pkg A requires Pkg A-extras,
> and Pkg A-extras BR Pkg A. It would make bootstrapping a dist more
> complicated. For some pkgs (e.g. leaf pkgs) it is fine if the
Till Maas wrote:
> Btw. using the "path of least resistance" to implement policy
> changes seems to be what makes the new workflows suck for package
> maintainers, e.g. with the change in place using a auto-karma value of 1
> will become 0.
That would be a good thing! It'd make all those requireme
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 13:59 +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
> I wonder about the maintainer ship of epiphany. The ownership of it is
> gecko-maint but in none of the current versions of fedora is epiphany
> gecko based and of the 18 other maintainers not a single person is on
> the bugzilla watc
Nils Philippsen wrote:
> AIUI, a SIG are more people than those who actually work on related
> packages as maintainers, or are competent and responsible enough to not
> break things in the process of updating packages with which they're not
> familiar (otherwise they'd be (co-)maintainers, wouldn't
Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> There _is_ a middle ground between bleeding edge and extremely stable.
>
> A Fedora release should have a locked version of key shared packages,
> such as Python, Rails, etc., should be kept at a specific version (with
> upgrades only for bug fixes).
Well, I don't know h
Sven Lankes wrote:
> Maybe we could tweak the pkgdb in a way that a co-maintainer request
> would automatically be granted if it isn't answered within a long enough
> timeframe (say 8 weeks).
>
> That way packages with AWOL maintainers could grow co-maintainers
> without going through the complica
Thomas Spura wrote:
> For me it doesn't make much sense to be co-maintainer everywhere, but
> actually:
> 1. doing all the tasks alone.
I don't see the big problem. I'm "comaintaining" a few packages in that way
for a while (xchat and mingw32-nsis come to my mind) and that just works
(though I d
Till Maas wrote:
> We can use "uberpackagers" ;-) or maybe "package-monkeys", make it a SIG
> and then it is afaik already covered by Fedora procedures, because a SIG
> or group of packagers can own a package, like e.g. the lvm-team.
>
> Orcan, Richard, who else is in?
As an "inclusionist" and so
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:43 +0100
> "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>> If #maintainers == 0 then the package is either just sitting there (as
>> long as there are no serious bugs), or is being best-effort maintained
>> by provenpackagers, at least until that becomes a burden and
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> And IMHO 8 weeks is too much, it should be somewhere between 2 and 4.
>
> Kevin Kofler
>
>
I initially thought 8 weeks was too long also, but I guess people have
busy lifestyles. 4 weeks is probably more realistic. If you can't
acces
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
> maintainer ("owner"?) and co-maintainers, rather than just having all
> co-maintainers be equal?
Good point. I think, just like you, that there should be a list of owners
rather than just 1 owner.
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 01:46 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> (BTW, it's quite funny that the main GTK+-based IRC client is maintained
> almost exclusively by a KDE SIG member. ;-) )
Well, I use the xchat-gnome fork. I suspect quite a lot of other GNOME-y
folks do...that one's maintained by Brian Pep
Hard to believe, but Fedora QA starts its "Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance
Test Plan" testing this Thursday (2010-07-08).
We've run out of time and run way to implement a new means of tracking
blocker bugs for Fedora--previously discussed in the context of using
flags in Bugzilla. We'll continue
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Some mailing list like dumping-gro...@fedoraproject.org. I am sure
> someone can come up with a better name.
[snip]
> Yes. And everyone who is subscribed to the above mailing list is a
> potential maintainer of those packages with 0 principal maintainers.
Well, you'd have to
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 17:10 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
> Hard to believe, but Fedora QA starts its "Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance
> Test Plan" testing this Thursday (2010-07-08).
>
> We've run out of time and run way to implement a new means of tracking
> blocker bugs for Fedora--previously disc
On Tuesday, 06 July 2010 at 11:53, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:13:40AM +0800, Chen Lei wrote:
> > 2010/6/18 Chen Lei :
[...]
> > Can we orphan his packages now? I'd like to take scons, I don't think
> > waiting more time will be helpful.
>
> According to:
> https://admin
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:56:41 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
> > maintainer ("owner"?) and co-maintainers, rather than just having all
> > co-maintainers be equal?
>
> Good point. I think, just
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:56:41AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > I think this is another problem with pkgdb or Fedora. Why is there a
> > maintainer ("owner"?) and co-maintainers, rather than just having all
> > co-maintainers be equal?
>
It was set up this way becaus
Richard W.M. Jones wrote, at 07/07/2010 02:42 AM +9:00:
> I get this build failure trying to build vhostmd:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2298698
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=2298704&name=build.log
>
> + autoreconf
> configure:11354: error: possibly
Orion Poplawski píše v Út 06. 07. 2010 v 17:03 -0600:
> Apparently[1] it is up to the desktop environment now to deactivate the LVDS
> display if the laptop lid is closed at boot (or whenever?). I now have
> several F13 laptops in docks with external monitors that boot with the lid
> closed, b
91 matches
Mail list logo
