I love this well explained license changes: "Ah, removing file
extension, that is good opportunity to change the license as well" :)
https://github.com/devopsgroup-io/vagrant-hostmanager/commit/e97bc6fd169bed754755d8f3f68786610ef48281
Vít
Dne 5.5.2017 v 04:52 Randy Barlow napsal(a):
> vagrant-
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 11:04:40AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> https://torrent.fedoraproject.org/stats/
> But yes, I think the vast majority of downloads these days are direct
> downloads from the mirror network.
And it's almost impossible for us to get clean, useful data from that.
We don't have
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 09:46 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I love this well explained license changes: "Ah, removing file
> extension, that is good opportunity to change the license as well" :)
> https://github.com/devopsgroup-io/vagrant-hostmanager/commit/e97bc6fd
> 169bed754755d8f3f68786610ef48281
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:55:47PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> El mar, 25-04-2017 a las 17:52 +0200, Jakub Jelinek escribió:
> > Hi!
> >
> > A severe ABI bug on AArch64 and especially on ARM 32-bit has been
> > recently discovered and GCC 7.1 is going to have that ABI change in.
> > For details
On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 04:18:47PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I've started our own mass rebuild. To whittle down the list of packages
> to rebuild, I chose to only build C++ packages. This I did by looking
> at *.debug files, DW_AT_producer in particular.
>
> The aarch64 rebuild is done, and
Same thing happened in the early Cython days [0] and was discovered recently
that the change never propagated to the rpm package.
[0]
https://github.com/cython/cython/commit/9dd6b09e562210ebe758ca988d96f09e93c496f0
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447681
Charalampos Stratakis
As
El jue, 04-05-2017 a las 07:57 -0400, Josh Boyer escribió:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Kate Carcia
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > We have recently verified the list of candidates for F27. The link
> > with the
> > updated list is below.
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineerin
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base qcow2 x86_64
Atomic qcow2 x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Failed openQA tests: 74/116 (x86_64), 22/23 (i386)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170504.n.1):
ID: 91727 Test: i38
2017-05-03 15:14 GMT+02:00 Michael Cronenworth :
> On 05/03/2017 05:27 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote:
>
>> https://kozea.github.io/Radicale/1to2/
>>
>> Any comments are welcomed.
>>
>
> Is the only upgrade method to run Radicale v1 and v2 side-by-side? How
> will you be handling that?
>
Yes, unfor
I cannot submit updates, is something going on? I get this error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 225, in main
data = bodhi.save(**update_args)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py", line 82,
in wrapper
result = method(*args, **kw
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2017-05-05)
===
Meeting started by kalev at 16:02:00 UTC. The full logs are available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-05-05/fesco.2017-05-05-16.02.log.html
.
Meeting summary
---
On Fri, 5 May 2017, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote:
I cannot submit updates, is something going on? I get this error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 225, in main
data = bodhi.save(**update_args)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py", lin
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 19:41 +0100, Michael Young wrote:
> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1445294 and in
> particular
> the patches linked to in Comments 6 and 7.
Indeed, I'm working right now at getting a bodhi-2.6.2 update released.
Also, Patrick has made a python-fedora-0.9 rel
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base qcow2 x86_64
Atomic qcow2 x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 22/116 (x86_64), 11/23 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in 26-20170504.n.1):
ID: 91968 Test: i386 universal inst
# F26 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2017-05-08
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
It's that time of the week again! We've got 4 proposed blockers for
Beta that we need to look through. If you have time between now and
Monday to go through the list of blockers
I found a package that people may actually use that I could package for, The
Brotli command line tool by Google, as it can have a much better compression
ratio than LZMA or LZMA2 for a lot of files. Though according to the Fedora
Wiki, they say to "inform upstream". Should I do this first before
The following updates address the bodhi client issue:
Rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=887188
F26: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-26b2a7f9ba
F25: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-d069d3faf9
F24: https://bodhi.fedorap
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 17:35 -0500, po...@pouar.net wrote:
> Though according to the Fedora Wiki, they say to "inform upstream".
> Should I do this first before creating a review request for the
> package or wait until the package is approved?
You can do it in either order - it's more about introdu
18 matches
Mail list logo
