Re: Changes to make MySQL vs. MariaDB less confusing

On 21/08 17.26, Ken Dreyer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:54 AM, James Hogarth > wrote: > > > When the switch was first proposed it was Oracle who was most vocal against > > it to the point of them stating they'd take over package ownership and > > filing #958131 to update to 5.6 and change

Fedora 20 Bugzilla Rawhide rebase

Greetings, This e-mail is intended to inform you about the upcoming Bugzilla changes happening the week after August 20, 2013 (Rawhide bug rebase) and what you need to do, if anything. We will be automatically changing the version for most rawhide bugs to Fedora 20. This will result in regular

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Till Maas wrote: > modplugtools needs to be changed to not ship modplugplay anymore, but > modplug123 should still work. Done in F-20+. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Cond

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Greetings all > > After sitting Dan's Walsh Secure Linux Containers talk at flock where he > mentioned him and Dan B. had successfully scaled application containers > to what 8000 instances or so and I noticing that his slide wh

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:45 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Greetings all > > After sitting Dan's Walsh Secure Linux Containers talk at flock where he > mentioned him and Dan B. had successfully scaled application containers to > what 8000 instances or so and I noticing that his slide where

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On 08/22/2013 01:06 AM, Simo Sorce wrote: On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: I would like us to change our default to use long hostname instead as in the fqdn or "container01.ackme.com" and would love any kind of feed back in that regard ( why we should not defa

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On 08/22/2013 09:10 AM, Ondrej Vasik wrote: On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: I perfectly understand the reasons for the change and I think we should definitely change it at least on the login screen (I like the one additional line idea from Simo). In the termin

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On 08/22/2013 09:13 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: On cloud images we actually lock the root account so it's unusable. In the case of cloud providers the standard deployment is generally along the lines of either injecting ssh keys for root and unlocking it or creating a standard user account, inje

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 10:39 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/22/2013 09:10 AM, Ondrej Vasik wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > > > I perfectly understand the reasons for the change and I think we should > > definitely change it at least on t

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On 08/22/2013 11:03 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote: On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 10:39 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: On 08/22/2013 09:10 AM, Ondrej Vasik wrote: On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: I perfectly understand the reasons for the change and I think we shou

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:09 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > You would just overwrite in in your own .bashrc if you have long > hostname and they get in your way. Yes, the same applies in the opposite direction. > Long hostnames are far more practical for administrators to use then > sh

Self Introduction

Hi All, Having a great interrest in combining both the qualities of SSD's (speed) and the qualities of HDD's (capacity) I added the following change: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SSD_cache Since this change was accepted, I now have to really do something :-) As a result here's my f

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said: > You would just overwrite in in your own .bashrc if you have long > hostname and they get in your way. > > Long hostnames are far more practical for administrators to use then > short hostnames have ever been. That's your opinion; please don't sta

koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1341/5841341/root.log The package, which builds fine in f20 and rawhide, buildrequires the following: BuildRequires: /usr/bin/perldoc BuildRequires: cpio BuildRequires: glibc-stati

Overall fedora-review test results.

In an attempt to test fedora-review we have run it on almost allpackages in the complete rawhide distribution. Our primary objective is to certify that fedora-review is stable for all this kind of input. Also, these test reveals some false warnings and other errors. Some are detected and fixed,

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

Very interesting... What's the possibility of parsing all the data and sending individual reports to -owner@ ? I don't know that I'd want to get this type of thing frequently, but once would be nice... Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.o

File Perl6-Caller-0.100.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Perl6-Caller: d19ce32a9b7f7dfbb59aff7e38d476b9 Perl6-Caller-0.100.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/ma

[perl-Perl6-Caller] Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2)

commit 9588ef99c2505a00c4a56934d92efd58fc416b71 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Thu Aug 22 14:44:40 2013 +0100 Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2) By default, this module exports the caller function. This automatically returns a new caller object. An optional argument specifi

Re: koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1341/5841341/root.log > > The package, which builds fine in f20 and rawhide, buildrequires > the following: > > BuildRequires:

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On 2013-08-22 15:41, Richard Shaw wrote: Very interesting... What's the possibility of parsing all the data and sending individual reports to -owner@ ? I don't know that I'd want to get this type of thing frequently, but once would be nice... Richard The data is already parsed, I hav

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Alec Leamas wrote: > The data is already parsed, I have tools to generate list of packages > failing a given test as well as all tests failing for a given package. > It's just that all this is quite a lot of data... > > No way this will happen often, though. This

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On 2013-08-22 15:54, Richard Shaw wrote: Yes... sorry I assumed you knew... -ow...@fedoraproject.org Richard No, I don't know much. Well, it should basically be piece of cake to generate such an email for all packages. Before doing such a thing I would certa

Re: koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

On Thursday, August 22, 2013 09:58 PM, drago01 wrote: On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1341/5841341/root.log The package, which builds fine in f20 and rawhide, bui

[perl-Perl6-Caller/f19] Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2)

Summary of changes: 9588ef9... Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2) (*) (*) 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://

Re: koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:03:06PM +0800, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > On Thursday, August 22, 2013 09:58 PM, drago01 wrote: > >On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > >wrote: > >> > >>Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? > >>http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/t

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 08:21 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said: > > You would just overwrite in in your own .bashrc if you have long > > hostname and they get in your way. > > > > Long hostnames are far more practical for administrators to use then > > shor

[perl-true/f19] Initial import (perl-true-0.18-2)

Summary of changes: a4d4beb... Initial import (perl-true-0.18-2) (*) (*) 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.fed

[Bug 999032] perl-Ouch-0.0405 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=999032 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version|

F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger question of the 6-month cycle overall, but just, right now, slowing down for a release to get som

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:08:18PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > > What things we do _now_ could be > > improved with the investment of some effort? > Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect > the mass rebuild. Apparently less so with all the new ARM builders, rig

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

- Original Message - > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: > > What things we do _now_ could be > > improved with the investment of some effort? > > Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect > the mass rebuild. It's unfortunately about P

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > What things we do _now_ could be > improved with the investment of some effort? Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect the mass rebuild. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fed

Re: koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:23:55 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1341/5841341/root.log > > The package, which builds fine in f20 and rawhide

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo > meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle > for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger question of the 6-month > cycle ove

[389-devel] please review: Ticket 47394 - remove-ds.pl should remove /var/lock/dirsrv

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47394 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/47394/0001-Ticket-47394-remove-ds.pl-should-remove-var-lock-dir.patch -- Mark Reynolds 389 Development Team Red Hat, Inc mreyno...@redhat.com -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org http

[perl-true] Created tag perl-true-0.18-2.fc20

The lightweight tag 'perl-true-0.18-2.fc20' was created pointing to: a4d4beb... Initial import (perl-true-0.18-2) -- 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

[perl-true] Created tag perl-true-0.18-2.fc19

The lightweight tag 'perl-true-0.18-2.fc19' was created pointing to: a4d4beb... Initial import (perl-true-0.18-2) -- 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

[perl-true] Created tag perl-true-0.18-2.fc21

The lightweight tag 'perl-true-0.18-2.fc21' was created pointing to: a4d4beb... Initial import (perl-true-0.18-2) -- 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

Re: Scala package owner unresponsive

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 09:41:52PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Will Benton wrote: > > (1) As far as I can tell, the package for Scala 2.9.2 on F19 (2.9.2-2) has > > broken dependencies; I can't install it via yum on my new F19 install. Is > > this the case for

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

Once upon a time, Ondrej Vasik said: > I agree that opening square bracket is useless, but I want to have the > directory and $/# character separated. This prompt is well established, > however I agree that we can probably get one character less with > something like > foo@localhost lib>$ I free

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 11:03:52 -0400 Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the > FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer > release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at lea

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:27:47 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > In an attempt to test fedora-review we have run it on almost allpackages > in the complete rawhide distribution. Our primary objective is to > certify that fedora-review is stable for all this kind of input. Also, > these test reveals som

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:19:09 +0200 drago01 wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: > > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the > > FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer > > release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (righ

[perl-Perl6-Caller] Created tag perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.fc18

The lightweight tag 'perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.fc18' was created pointing to: 9588ef9... Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2) -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.o

[perl-Perl6-Caller] Created tag perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.el6

The lightweight tag 'perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.el6' was created pointing to: 9588ef9... Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2) -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.or

[perl-Perl6-Caller] Created tag perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.el5

The lightweight tag 'perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2.el5' was created pointing to: 9588ef9... Initial import (perl-Perl6-Caller-0.100-2) -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.or

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 22 August 2013 16:03, Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo > meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle > for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger question of the > 6-month > cycle overall,

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 08/22/2013 05:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger question of the 6-month cycle overall, but just,

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:03:22 +0200 Alec Leamas wrote: > On 2013-08-22 15:54, Richard Shaw wrote: > > Yes... sorry I assumed you knew... > > > > -ow...@fedoraproject.org > > > > Richard > No, I don't know much. > > Well, it should basically be piece of cake to gen

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On 2013-08-22 17:45, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:27:47 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: In an attempt to test fedora-review we have run it on almost allpackages in the complete rawhide distribution. Our primary objective is to certify that fedora-review is stable for all this kind o

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 08/22/2013 05:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:08:18PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: What things we do _now_ could be improved with the investment of some effort? Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect the mass rebuild. Apparently les

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:00:54 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: ...snip... > > What Infrastructure projects would be helped by this? > A web infrastructure to > * ease package orphanage. > * launch AWOL/MIA requests > * a unified koji/bodhi/bugzilla Web-GUI > * much longer build.log holding time for FT

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 11:03:52 -0400 Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the > FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer > release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger > question of the 6-month cycle

Re: koji/f19 problem: kernel-xen.fc10 (!) pulled in for kernel?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:17:32AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:23:55 +0100 > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > Anyone want to hazard a guess about what's going on here? > > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:27:20 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: > The issue with this perl rebuilt was the person conducting the > initial rebuild didn't manage to finish it. Don't get me wrong - He > did a good job, but his time frame simply was unrealistically short. Well, I noticed the rebuild was r

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:00:54 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 08/22/2013 05:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the > > FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer >

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 08/22/2013 03:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger question of the 6-month cycle overall, but just,

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 08/22/2013 06:47 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Well, I noticed the rebuild was running only some times. I assume when they were there to launch the builds in that batch? Is there any way all the builds could be listed and just fired off and queued all at once? Peter queue honor build requires (Den

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:10:12 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > > Funny! I'm interested in hearing more about these, > > > >| 347 CheckStaticLibs > >|Static libs not in a -static package. Most are haskell packages > >|which have an exception not handled by f-r. There are more,

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:27:47 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > The overall results with some comments are at http://ur1.ca/f5xxw . The CheckSoFiles results might be .so plug-in libs (extension modules), which are stored in private paths, i.e. outside run-time linker's search. Or even non-versioned sh

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 11:03:52 -0400 Matthew Miller wrote: > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the > FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer > release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the bigger > question of the 6-month cycle

Re: Self Introduction

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Rolf Fokkens wrote: > Hi All, > > Having a great interrest in combining both the qualities of SSD's (speed) > and the qualities of HDD's (capacity) I added the following change: > https://fedoraproject.org/**wiki/Changes/SSD_cache

Rebuilding in dependency order (was: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?)

Miroslav Suchy wrote: >On 08/22/2013 06:47 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Well, I noticed the rebuild was running only some times. I assume >> when they were there to launch the builds in that batch? >> >> Is there any way all the builds could be listed and just fired off >> and queued all at once? > >P

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:38:38AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > In general most of our constraints are people related. We just don't > have enough developers and sysadmins to setup, deploy and maintain all > the things we might want to do. I definitely know how that is. Of the list you give, maybe

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On 08/22/2013 03:19 PM, drago01 wrote: Given that most of this stuff can be done parallel to the release (it is not like everyone is busy for full 6 months during the release cycle) I doubt this gains us much if anything. This is laughable response we in QA and I'm pretty sure it's the same fo

Re: Overall fedora-review test results.

On 2013-08-22 19:20, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:27:47 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: The overall results with some comments are at http://ur1.ca/f5xxw . The CheckSoFiles results might be .so plug-in libs (extension modules), which are stored in private paths, i.e. outside run-

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/22/2013 03:19 PM, drago01 wrote: >> >> Given that most of this stuff can be done parallel to the release (it >> is not like everyone is busy for full 6 months during the release >> cycle) I doubt this gains us much if anything

[perl-YAML-Tiny] Created tag perl-YAML-Tiny-1.54-1.fc21

The lightweight tag 'perl-YAML-Tiny-1.54-1.fc21' was created pointing to: 534335f... Update to 1.54 -- 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-devel

[perl-YAML-Tiny] Created tag perl-YAML-Tiny-1.54-1.fc20

The lightweight tag 'perl-YAML-Tiny-1.54-1.fc20' was created pointing to: 534335f... Update to 1.54 -- 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-devel

[perl-Test-Kwalitee] Update to 1.13

commit f6fd2cd1da5e06972c74e36f0f6f6c3a0f8d1175 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Thu Aug 22 19:42:55 2013 +0100 Update to 1.13 - New upstream release 1.13 - Added missing abstract for kwalitee-metrics script - No longer issuing a warning if the test is running from xt/ (see v

[perl-Carp-Fix-1_25/f20] (2 commits) ...Unbundle Test-Simple and use the system one (#998410)

Summary of changes: 2c4bf77... Initial import (perl-Carp-Fix-1_25-1.01-2) (*) 6123b32... Unbundle Test-Simple and use the system one (#998410) (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SI

F20 release name election?

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/about/relnamef20 Is this thing for real? https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/ says the End Date is 2013-08-23 23:59:59. Where has it been announced this time? There's nothing in the archives for announce and devel-announce list. -- devel mailing list d

Re: F20 release name election?

On 22 August 2013 13:31, Michael Schwendt wrote: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/about/relnamef20 > > Is this thing for real? > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/ > says the End Date is 2013-08-23 23:59:59. > > Where has it been announced this time? > There's nothing in the archiv

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:03:52AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > As we look at Fedora.next ideas and possibly decide to start implementation > in the F21 timeframe, we will likely find _new_ things that take specific > work. Let's not worry about that right now. What things we do _now_ could be >

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:41:25AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:00:54 +0200 > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > ...snip... > > > > What Infrastructure projects would be helped by this? > > A web infrastructure to > > * ease package orphanage. > > * launch AWOL/MIA requests > > * a

[389-devel] Please review (coverity fix): [389 Project] #48: Active Directory has certain uids which are reserved and will cause a Directory Server replica initialization of an AD server to abort.

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48/0001-Ticket-48-Active-Directory-has-certain-uids-which-ar.2.patch git patch file (master) -- fixing Coverity CID 11943 Coverity CID 11943 - Logically dead code Fix description: The following commit mistak

Re: F20 release name election?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > On 22 August 2013 13:31, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/about/relnamef20 >> >> Is this thing for real? >> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/ >> says the End Date is 2013-08-23 23:59

Re: F20 release name election?

On 22 August 2013 14:45, Dan Mashal wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > > > > What happened to naming 20 in honor of Seth? > > Dan > > I believe that it was decided that like had been done in the past, this release would be dedicated to Seth Vidal, but no

Re: F20 release name election?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > I believe that it was decided that like had been done in the past, this > release would be dedicated to Seth Vidal, but not named after him as Seth > hated released names with a white hot passion of 10,000 supernovas. [Of > course he w

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 17:19 +0200, drago01 wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: > > Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo > > meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle > > for Fedora 21 -- not (right

Re: Proposal for new package group: Development:Formal Methods Tools

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 1:31 PM, John C. Peterson wrote: > I would like to edit comps.xml to add a new package group for the tools > that have already been packaged by the Formal Methods SIG. > > I propose that the group be located under the "Development" category. > > Id: formal-methods-tools > N

Re: F20 release name election?

On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > [Of course he would probably still laugh if the release was named Vidalia > Onion] HEY! Why isn't Vidalia Onion one of the name options? That's way better than any of the other options. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lis

Re: F20 release name election?

On 8/22/2013 7:03 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >> [Of course he would probably still laugh if the release was named Vidalia >> Onion] > > HEY! Why isn't Vidalia Onion one of the name options? That's way better than > any of the other

Re: F20 release name election?

Il 23/08/2013 01:08, David ha scritto: On 8/22/2013 7:03 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: [Of course he would probably still laugh if the release was named Vidalia Onion] HEY! Why isn't Vidalia Onion one of the name options? That's way bette

Re: F20 release name election?

Il 22/08/2013 22:53, Dan Mashal ha scritto: On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: I believe that it was decided that like had been done in the past, this release would be dedicated to Seth Vidal, but not named after him as Seth hated released names with a white hot passio

Re: F20 release name election?

Il 23/08/2013 01:22, punto...@libero.it ha scritto: Il 22/08/2013 22:53, Dan Mashal ha scritto: On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: I believe that it was decided that like had been done in the past, this release would be dedicated to Seth Vidal, but not named after him

Re: Changes to make MySQL vs. MariaDB less confusing

On 8/21/2013 5:01 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Ken Dreyer said: I fear a similar fate is going to befall mysql-workbench before too long, since it's been orphaned for a while. Are the Oracle employees still around? I looked a while back, and it is marked "deprecated" in the Fedora

Re: F20 release name election?

On Aug 22, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: >> I believe that it was decided that like had been done in the past, this >> release would be dedicated to Seth Vidal, but not named after him as Seth >> hated released names with a

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Aug 22, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > some of the things I would like to work on include, fully automating > the release process, today i have to do mutliple things from multiple > locations to trigger off the different pieces of the release. write a > tool like mash for pulling

Re: bug filed against "distribution"

On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 22:05 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > since i have enough of bugzilla-mails as response of bugreports > containing referecnes to any Fedora version but not the reported > i consider this as bug in the distribution itself > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998035 >

Re: F19 server install experience

On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 11:57 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 08/17/2013 12:28 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> VLAN setup for installing! Yay! However, after rebooting, > >> NetworkManager wasn't able to bring it up, something about not knowing > >> the "virtual interface name". Turned out to be th

Re: F20 release name election?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > *smack own forehead* I like that better than the other options also. For me, > one extra point for Vidalia onion over "20". > > Heck I like "Crazy Train" based on a recent Matthew Miller assertion. > > Assuming there can be no late add ins th

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Aug 22, 2013, at 3:03 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > QA, releng and anaconda are on a more or less permanent iteration > treadmill from Alpha TC1 onwards, severely limiting the time we have to > work on anything else. We can only really get substantive work done on > 'things that are not rele

Re: F20 release name election?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> *smack own forehead* I like that better than the other options also. For me, >> one extra point for Vidalia onion over "20". >> >> Heck I like "Crazy Train" based on a recent Matthew Mill

Re: F19 server install experience

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 11:57 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: >> On 08/17/2013 12:28 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Yeah, I've seen that kind of thing in some of my tests. A lot of my live > installs wind up with New York as the timezone, IIRC. I'm

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 18:11 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Aug 22, 2013, at 3:03 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > QA, releng and anaconda are on a more or less permanent iteration > > treadmill from Alpha TC1 onwards, severely limiting the time we have to > > work on anything else. We can only

Re: F19 server install experience

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 18:16 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 11:57 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > >> On 08/17/2013 12:28 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > Yeah, I've seen that kind of thing in some of my tests. A lot of my li

Re: F20 release name election?

On Aug 22, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: > > How about no release name, just this one time. In his honor? I'd back no release name for 20 with 8 points and 0 for everything else, if it's an option, and in particular if the marketing includes to the effect of: "Fedora 20 is nameless in h

Re: F19 server install experience

On Aug 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > No, we're not talking about the bash prompt on tty2, but there's an > actual *login prompt* on like tty6 or something. So far as I and the OP > knows, there is no account with a known password for you log in as, and > you have the root prompt

Re: F20 release name election?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: > > The choices are what the community came up with. At this point, that > is what we have to chose from. > > I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but there are essentially two camps > right now.

  1   2   >