perl-Module-Metadata-Changes-2.08-1.fc25 changed license from (Artistic 2.0)
to (GPL+ or Artistic).
-- Petr
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent from my Galaxy Tab® S2 Original message From: drago01
Date: 5/1/2016 12:00 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Development
discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re:
Plans for Node.js 6.x
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:00 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> OK folks, it's Bad Decision Time.
Hi Fedora developers,
As several people already started to propose their Changes for Fedora
25, I would like to emphasize a decision FESCo made in January [1],
not to do mass rebuild during the Fedora 25 development cycle [2].
All the Changes requiring mass rebuild should be postponed to Fedora 2
Hello!
this link
> [1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/fesco/fesco.2016-01-08-17.22.html
Do not explain more about the missing mass rebuild. Are there more infomration
about?
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/25/Schedule
Thanx!
J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedo
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> Hello!
>
> this link
> > [1]
> https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/fesco/fesco.2016-01-08-17.22.html
> Do not explain more about the missing mass rebuild. Are there more
> infomration about?
The link points to the minutes from the FESCo me
>
> ID: 15489 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_kde_64bit
> URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/15489
ID: 15493 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/15493
KDE has finally deps solved so I can debug this, working on it right now.
On 05/02/2016 12:15 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
Hi Fedora developers,
As several people already started to propose their Changes for Fedora
25, I would like to emphasize a decision FESCo made in January [1],
not to do mass rebuild during the Fedora 25 development cycle [2].
This is very unfortunate b
Change in package status over the last 168 hours
32 packages were orphaned
-
djview4 [epel7] was orphaned by fcami
DjVu viewer
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/djview4
freeradius-client [master, el6, ep
On 05/02/2016 02:16 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
The reason for not having mass rebuild during F25 development cycle is
very tight schedule for F25 and we would like to avoid slips in F25 as
much as possible. That is the main motivation here.
In other words sacrificing quality for marketing reasons - U
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 05/02/2016 02:16 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
>
> The reason for not having mass rebuild during F25 development cycle is
>> very tight schedule for F25 and we would like to avoid slips in F25 as
>> much as possible. That is the main motivation he
On 05/02/2016 09:12 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 05/02/2016 02:16 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:
>
>> The reason for not having mass rebuild during F25 development cycle is
>> very tight schedule for F25 and we would like to avoid slips in F25 as
>> much as possible. That is the main motivation here.
> In
OLD: Fedora-24-20160501.n.0
NEW: Fedora-24-20160502.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0.00 B
Size of dropped packages:0.00 B
Size of
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 9/58 (x86_64), 4/15 (i386)
ID: 15539 Test: x86_64 Atomic-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/test
Missing expected images:
Workstation live i386
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 5/63 (x86_64), 3/16 (i386)
ID: 15617 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/15617
ID: 15622 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso
On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 15:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
[...]
> All of the major stakeholders that usually trigger a mass rebuild (GCC, glibc,
> etc.) have been notified directly and are on board with this. This
> announcement
> was to ensure that no one was left surprised by this in case we mis
On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 14:51 +0200, Jan Sedlak wrote:
> >
> > ID: 15492 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit
> > URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/15492
>
>
> Not sure what is causing this and I can't reproduce it locally.
I'll rebuild the base disk image this afternoon
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
> On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 15:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> [...]
>> All of the major stakeholders that usually trigger a mass rebuild (GCC,
>> glibc,
>> etc.) have been notified directly and are on board with this. This
>>
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:03:51AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> wrote:
> > On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 15:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > [...]
> >> All of the major stakeholders that usually trigger a mass rebuild (GCC,
> >> glibc,
Hi all,
as promised on the last Modularity WG meeting [0], here's
a module build proposal we've been pondering for a while.
As always, this is nowhere near final and there are still many
open questions. The purpose of this mail is to get some early
feedback. Feel free to comment, especially if
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:52:44 -0500
Adam Miller wrote:
> Hello all,
> We're wrapping up the first phase of the Fedora Docker Layered
> Image Build Service[0] and the time has come to start thinking about
> what we as a Project need to do to formalize what it means to be
> shipping Docker Layer
On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 18:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:03:51AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> > wrote:
> > > On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 15:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >> All of the major st
On 2 May 2016 17:05, "Chris Murphy" wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> wrote:
> > On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 15:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > [...]
> >> All of the major stakeholders that usually trigger a mass rebuild
(GCC, glibc,
> >> etc.) have been n
>>> The reason for not having mass rebuild during F25 development cycle is
>>> very tight schedule for F25 and we would like to avoid slips in F25 as
>>> much as possible. That is the main motivation here.
>> In other words sacrificing quality for marketing reasons - Utterly poor :(
>>
>
> It's not
On 05/02/2016 03:35 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
The reason for not having mass rebuild during F25 development cycle is
very tight schedule for F25 and we would like to avoid slips in F25 as
much as possible. That is the main motivation here.
>>> In other words sacrificing quality for m
On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 19:22, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Monday, 02 May 2016 at 18:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:03:51AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Monday, 02 M
On 05/02/2016 01:24 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
There is strong engineering value in having two releases per year: release
early, release often. There are many projects that develop through Fedora that
get thrown into disarray when our cycle gets too far out of whack (prominent
examples being
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296734
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Net-Whois-IP-1.19-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 22:36 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> If there is genuine interest of start releasing fedora on time you will
> not achieve that goal by not doing or blocking mass rebuilds, you either
> need to stabilize anaconda development earlier in the cycle or find
> another
Hi!
I've just submitted a review request here
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332344
I'm a software developer from the UK currently living and working in
London on Linux-based set top box middleware. I've been a Linux user for
a long time, but never really offered much back. I've tri
Hi, this is just headsup that I'll rebase the libarchive in Rawhide today.
This should not cause breakage, no SONAME bump -- there's only one private
symbol missing (renamed, detected by abipkgdiff).
So, if there are issues, please open a bug.
Thanks, Pavel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedor
30 matches
Mail list logo
