On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:57 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:56 PM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Marko,
>>> glad to see compiz working for you. In the meanwhile I found this bug
>>> already reported:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.c
Hi fellow Fedorans.
I'd like to push a minor update of Lua, which incorporates a small
bugfix patch, and some cosmetic fixes to the builds script. First
testing by a proven tester has been done successfully, but I need more
testing to be able to push it, please have a look, try it and comment:
ht
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
It's a fairly minor technical change, though presumably people consider
thi
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
>
> It's a fairly
Summary of changes:
3b22373... Update to 0.28 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
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/mail
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius :
> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Heya,
>>
>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
>> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
>> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is
The lightweight tag 'perl-Package-Stash-0.28-1.fc15' was created pointing to:
3b22373... Update to 0.28
--
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/listinfo/perl-dev
On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius:
>> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> Heya,
>>>
>>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
>>> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
>>>
The lightweight tag 'perl-Package-Stash-0.28-1.fc16' was created pointing to:
3b22373... Update to 0.28
--
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/listinfo/perl-dev
commit 4752cd705e37cfe05a705c2444e5fff5c8b34214
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Sun Mar 27 14:53:53 2011 +0100
Tidy up changelog entries
perl-Perl-Critic.spec |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Perl-Critic.spec b/perl-Perl-Critic.spec
index 7f
commit 8d08a157e5cd0bc91e679e82130af91876657251
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:06:27 2011 +0100
Update to 1.114
- New upstream release 1.114:
- Documentation::RequirePodLinksIncludeText now handles nested POD
formatting
(CPAN RT#65569)
- Clarified rel
commit f7d19979d285f3a7e9cadd80594332363f5dbd9b
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:16:09 2011 +0100
Drop redundant (for modern rpm) BuildRoot tag and buildroot cleaning
perl-Perl-Critic.spec | 11 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-P
commit 0bc1d1f650a3bdd7a856e2855792208bc0031fc7
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:31:19 2011 +0100
Split Test::Perl::Critic::Policy off into its own package
perl-Perl-Critic.spec | 27 +++
1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/
commit 2868c631b83d5485b99bf59454790c74c7ba66f5
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Wed Mar 30 09:23:02 2011 +0100
Tidy dependencies and add --with authortests build option
- BR/R: optional modules perl(Readonly::XS), perl(Term::ANSIColor) >= 2.02
- BR: perl(Pod::Spell) >= 1
- BR: p
On Wed, 30.03.11 14:04, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
>
> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Heya,
> >
> > I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> > directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> > stumb
On 03/30/2011 02:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Heya,
>>
>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
>> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
>> stumble over it, so here's an explan
Summary of changes:
c185ce5... update to 1.113 (*)
4752cd7... Tidy up changelog entries (*)
8d08a15... Update to 1.114 (*)
f7d1997... Drop redundant (for modern rpm) BuildRoot tag and buildroot (*)
0bc1d1f... Split Test::Perl::Critic::Policy off into its own package (*)
2868c63... Tidy
Ralf Corsepius wote:
> It's a massive FHS violation
>
> => release blocker.
who cares ? also /cgroup /selinux /sys /debug ...
FHS is frozen since seven years ago.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/30/2011 05:34 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Heya,
>>
>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
>> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
>> stumble over it, so here's an explan
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=677888
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On 03/30/2011 05:34 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> Heya,
> >>
> >> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> >> directory /run in the root di
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=676688
Richard W.M. Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> The actual code changes we needed to implement this scheme were trivial
> (basically, just bind mount /var/run and /var/lock instead of mounting two
> new tmpfs' to them.), which is why we opted to do this so late in the F15
> cy
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 01:54:30 PM Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't find that. And hence
> this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE2
Applications must never create o
I just tried the new mesa* packages in Fedora 15 updates-testing on my
Sandy Bridge (Core i7 2600) system, and the results were not pretty.
X was completely unusable, with both of my screens "flashing" solid
black every few seconds.
These messages appeared in the syslog:
Mar 30 06:24:23 ian kerne
On 03/30/2011 06:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't find that. And hence
> this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
Added to the release notes
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docu
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=691896
--- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones 2011-03-30 08:38:17
EDT ---
Thanks, I will apply:
http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/file_downl
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 02:30:40PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't find that. And hence
> this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
More than that, it's explicitly allowed. So we
Hello!
2011/3/30 Ian Pilcher :
> I just tried the new mesa* packages in Fedora 15 updates-testing on my
> Sandy Bridge (Core i7 2600) system, and the results were not pretty.
> X was completely unusable, with both of my screens "flashing" solid
> black every few seconds.
I encountered similar iss
On 03/30/2011 01:11 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> 2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius:
>>> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the
Le Mer 30 mars 2011 14:04, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
>
> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Heya,
>>
>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
>> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
>> stumble over it, so here's
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:11 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > 2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius:
> >> On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >>> Heya,
> >>>
> >>> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which
> establishes a
> >>> dir
Le Mer 30 mars 2011 14:30, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
>
> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't find that. And hence
> this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
%<
Applications must never create or require spe
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Nicolas Mailhot
wrote:
> The FHS is about having major distros agree about file locations, and
> documenting the result. Which seems to be exactly what happened here.
Well, documentation on a mailing list is fine for F15, but it really
doesn't count long-term. If
On 03/30/2011 02:42 PM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 01:11 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>> 2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd int
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=691896
--- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones 2011-03-30 09:02:56
EDT ---
Also ported it to F15:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ta
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:36:38AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> No flames from me. This is a sensible, thought-through change with
> cross-distro buy-in and no major downsides. It is outside of the FHS, but is
> in the _spirit_ of it, and would fit into an updated release of the
> standard, if th
On 03/30/2011 02:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> The actual code changes we needed to implement this scheme were trivial
>> (basically, just bind mount /var/run and /var/lock instead of mounting two
>> new tmpfs' to them.), which
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't find that. And hence
> this change is perfectly FHS comp
Am 30.03.2011 15:05, schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
>> No flames from me. This is a sensible, thought-through change with
>> cross-distro buy-in and no major downsides.
>
> I could not disagree more.
without any argument?
if all distributions agree with it where exactly do you have
a problem? After 7
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=691896
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
On 03/30/2011 02:08 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
>
>> Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
>> other directories below / are allowed"? I can't fi
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=691896
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2011-03-30
09:14:51 EDT ---
ocaml-3.12.0-5.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fe
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:05:35PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 02:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > It is outside of the FHS,
> It's a clear violation of the FHS.
Indeed, but there really is no suitable FHS-compliant location for files
of these types, so we had no choice but to vio
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
>
> On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
>
> > Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
> > other directories be
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> There are many directories already in Fedora that are not
> defined by FHS and even though we have asked them to update
> it (libexec, /selinux /sys etc), there is noone maintaining
> it.
This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
fie
Russ herrold wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> There are many directories already in Fedora that are not
>> defined by FHS and even though we have asked them to update
>> it (libexec, /selinux /sys etc), there is noone maintaining
>> it.
> This is stunningly untrue. I've w
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:03, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
> > I also don't think you can really justify the "massive" qualifier in your
> > assertion. The actual text of the (7 year old) FHS has this to say:
> 7 year old doesn't mean obsolete and doesn't mean to adopt any crack
> ridden
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> With this upload Fedora and Suse have already adopted /run now. Debian
> folks will suggest this for their coming release. Ubuntu has agreed with
> introducing /run as well.
Bravo!
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
mar...@laptop.org
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>>
>> On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> > On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> >
>>
>> > Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say "no
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:05:27 PM Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
On 03/30/2011 07:00 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
> fields of LSB, FHS and LANANA to make sure there are traceable
> paths for such requests. Post the URLs to your bugs in the
> LSB / LF tracker if you assert you have done such
http://sourcef
commit 9180174161f5fd90971a01eaa80b60b406ab8bd4
Author: Tom "spot" Callaway
Date: Wed Mar 30 10:21:00 2011 -0400
1.223
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Gtk2.spec | 15 ++-
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/
On Wed, 30.03.11 19:56, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On 03/30/2011 07:00 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> > This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
> > fields of LSB, FHS and LANANA to make sure there are traceable
> > paths for such requests. Post the URLs to your b
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> So, this is what is implemented for F15 now. For F16 we will make a
> minor change on top of this: /var/run and /var/lock will become symlinks
> to /run (resp /run/lock), so that we don't have to use bind mounts
> anymore which
On Wed, 30.03.11 09:35, Adam Miller (maxamill...@fedoraproject.org) wrote:
> Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
> everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
> in Fedora land.
Well, the technical change is actually minimal, and this i
On Wed, 30.03.11 13:54, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
> With this upload Fedora and Suse have already adopted /run now. Debian
> folks will suggest this for their coming release. Ubuntu has agreed with
> introducing /run as well.
I guess I need to clarify this. Ubuntu actually
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 30.03.11 09:35, Adam Miller (maxamill...@fedoraproject.org) wrote:
>
>> Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
>> everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
>> in Fedora
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
On behalf of everyone at anaconda, thanks for fixing something we've all
lon
Hi,
thanks all for participation in Power Management Test Day -
we received great response. If you missed the event, you can
still participate (all feedback is very valuable for us):
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-24
PM Test Day Stats:
28 unique participants
27 unique machines
Michal Schmidt (mschm...@redhat.com) said:
> Compare this with org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.service which uses an
> indirect alias that can be enabled/disabled by systemctl:
> SystemdService=dbus-org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.service
>
> This was discussed in February on systemd-devel:
> htt
Am 30.03.2011 13:54, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
>
dracut and ud
Hi all,
The latest libedit update is CRITPATH, so it needs some karma. The
direct consumers of libedit, if my repoquery-fu is up to the task, are
the following, with their maintainers listed first, followed by
comaintainers:
Io-language: limb
asterisk: jcollie, fabbione, itamarjp
ceph: josef, bo
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 08:05:49PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On 03/08/2011 06:46 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > guile-2.0.0 has been released, there are some important changes.
> >
> > - The license changed from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv3+.
>
> Looks like that could cause some licensing iss
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=691913
--- Comment #3 from Jerry James 2011-03-30 12:52:52 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Jerry, if you are in the Fedora packager
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=691896
--- Comment #7 from Jerry James 2011-03-30 12:55:42 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Manual inspection has been insufficient
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:16 +0200, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 02:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> Heya,
> >>
> >> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> >> directory /run in the root directory. Most
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
> everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
> in Fedora land.
Well, up to a point, Lord Copper. We have a features process with lots
of burea
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:34 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The latest libedit update is CRITPATH, so it needs some karma. The
> direct consumers of libedit, if my repoquery-fu is up to the task, are
> the following, with their maintainers listed first, followed by
> comaintainers:
>
> I
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=590074
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
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=590074
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> There are many directories already in Fedora that are not defined by FHS
> and even though we have asked them to update it (libexec, /selinux
> /sys etc), there is noone maintaining it.
FWIW, libexec can be argued not to be a violation of the current FHS,
because the FH
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=590074
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-03-30
13:32:49 EDT ---
perl-Net-CUPS-0.61-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPE
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=590074
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-03-30
13:32:32 EDT ---
perl-Net-CUPS-0.61-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPE
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:24:42AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
>
> > Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
> > everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
> > in Fedora land.
>
>
On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
> of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
> have been 'features', not submit them as features, and happily bypass
> the entire 'feature' process with all its bureaucracy
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Adam Miller
wrote:
> however, a little concerned with the precedence it is either creating or
> following in the path of.
This has behind is something IMHO bigger than FESCo: the agreement of
key maintainers across distros. That's hard enough to pull -- and it's
a
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:49 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:24:42AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
> > > everyone equally follow suit on
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
> > of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
> > have been 'features', not submit them as features, and happily
On 03/30/2011 11:19 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
>
> So we should disband FESCo and just let everyone commit whatever changes
> they want without oversight or community inclusion and just hope it builds
> and runs in the end?
Yes, I am sure that is the best course of action. Can you cut out the
need
On 03/30/2011 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
>> Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
> I have better things to do than spend my morning looking through old
> changelogs and freeze dates, thanks. Are you
On 03/30/2011 07:54 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
>
> It's a fairly
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 23:42 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> >> Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
> > I have better things to do than spend my morning l
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 11:19 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
>>
>> So we should disband FESCo and just let everyone commit whatever changes
>> they want without oversight or community inclusion and just hope it builds
>> and runs in the end?
>
> Yes, I am su
On 03/30/2011 11:01 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
>>> of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
>>> have been 'fe
On 03/26/2011 12:52 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Does anyone have a means to contact Axel Thimm and confirm he's ok and
> if he wishes to maintain his packages in Fedora moving forward?
> (I've cc'ed him on this as well).
As far as "OK" at least, he seems to have been OK on
Mon Mar 2
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 11:16 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 11:01 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> >> On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
> >>> of times, to simply go ahe
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 20:16 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> FHS does not require every RPM package to not add arbitrary
> directories, but Fedora packaging guidelines do. We have a packaging
> standard. This change violates that packaging standard, so there are
> three possibilities:
Can you cit
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:20:55 -0500
Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 03/26/2011 12:52 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Greetings.
> >
> > Does anyone have a means to contact Axel Thimm and confirm he's ok
> > and if he wishes to maintain his packages in Fedora moving forward?
> > (I've cc'ed him on this as we
Am 30.03.2011 20:01, schrieb Adam Williamson:
>> Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
>
> I have better things to do than spend my morning looking through old
> changelogs and freeze dates, thanks. Are you really suggesting it's
> never happened?
if you ha
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2011-03-30)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 17:30:01 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-03-30/fesco.2011-03-30-17.30.log.html
Meeting summary
-
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 20:16 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>
>> FHS does not require every RPM package to not add arbitrary
>> directories, but Fedora packaging guidelines do. We have a packaging
>> standard. This change violates that packa
On 03/31/2011 12:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> so please do the better things instead flaming here about a
> single folder which introducing is not political correct enough
> for your eyes
Pretty sure you completely misunderstood Adam Williamson. He has not
flamed anybody.
Rahul
--
devel ma
On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> What more would you want? "Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
> follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?"
But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions. All it says is
that it should be carefully considered.
Ra
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>> What more would you want? "Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
>> follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?"
>
> But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions
Am 30.03.2011 20:44, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>> What more would you want? "Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
>> follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?"
>
> But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions. All it
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 20:30 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> so please do the better things instead flaming here about a
> single folder which introducing is not political correct enough
> for your eyes
Um, you seem to be misreading the thread. I'm not opposing the change.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora
On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 00:14 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > What more would you want? "Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
> > follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?"
>
> But FHS permits this change to be done by distribut
The lightweight tag 'perl-Devel-Cycle-1.07-1.el4' was created pointing to:
2eb04c9... Merge branch 'el4' into el5
--
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
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
