Release rpkg-1.56 and fedpkg-1.35

2018-08-22 Thread Chenxiong Qi
Hi, New version rpkg-1.56 and fedpkg-1.35 are released. Release notes: * rpkg: https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg/releases/1.56.html * fedpkg: https://docs.pagure.org/fedpkg/releases/1.35.html Bodhi updates: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpkg-1.56-1.fc28%20fedpkg-1.35-1.fc28 https://bodhi.

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

2018-08-22 Thread Dan Horák
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 17:13:42 -0400 Omair Majid wrote: > * Michael Cronenworth [2018-08-15 10:19]: > > On 08/15/2018 08:55 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > Are you sure about that?  Ocaml does it as well. > > > > The guidelines allow an initial bootstrap from binaries, but > > subsequent builds a

Re: Orphaning procedure for python-ivi -vxi11 -usbtmc -testify

2018-08-22 Thread Antonio Trande
At this point, the packages are orphaned. Please, follow the 'Claiming Ownership of an Orphaned Package' guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package On 22/08/2018 07:05, Manas Mangaonkar wrote: > Hey, > > Please

Intent to upgrade Django in f29 to 2.1

2018-08-22 Thread Matthias Runge
Hello, sorry for the late notice; Django 2.1 was recently released, and I intend to update Django in F29 to version 2.1. Apparently, all depending packages still build, all the details in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1611025 If I don't hear anything against it until Monday, I'll m

Re: Intent to upgrade Django in f29 to 2.1

2018-08-22 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 22.8.2018 10:59, Matthias Runge wrote: Hello, sorry for the late notice; Django 2.1 was recently released, and I intend to update Django in F29 to version 2.1. Apparently, all depending packages still build, all the details in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1611025 2 packages

Fwd: Soname break for glew

2018-08-22 Thread Nicolas Chauvet
I'm preparing an update for glew to 2.1.0 (with soname bump) (pushed in rawhide but not built yet). https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29087244 Given that the freeze break is next week, I will push the update in rawhide, then in f29 next. Here are the dependencies: FlightGear-Atl

[modularity] Managing module lifecycles — let's talk!

2018-08-22 Thread Adam Samalik
During the Modularity WG meeting yesterday [1], we've touched the topic of module lifecycles. Even though there are some ideas in the air as well as some code written, we haven't reached a state in which we would know how exactly to deal with it. So I'd like to discuss it here with a wider audience

Re: Intent to upgrade Django in f29 to 2.1

2018-08-22 Thread Matthias Runge
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:51:34AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 22.8.2018 10:59, Matthias Runge wrote: > > Hello, > > > > sorry for the late notice; Django 2.1 was recently released, and > > I intend to update Django in F29 to version 2.1. > > > > Apparently, all depending packages still build

Re: Release rpkg-1.56 and fedpkg-1.35

2018-08-22 Thread Jun Aruga
> rpkg: https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg/releases/1.56.html > Greenwave policy could be validated when build a package with build command, > or a container with container-build command, if policy file gating.yaml is > created in the root directory inside repostiory. If the policy is valid, > build w

Re: Orphaning procedure for python-ivi -vxi11 -usbtmc -testify

2018-08-22 Thread Manas Mangaonkar
Thanks for the link,will do :) - Manas On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:15 Antonio Trande, wrote: > At this point, the packages are orphaned. > > Please, follow the 'Claiming Ownership of an Orphaned Package' > guidelines: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Cla

Re: Orphaning procedure for python-ivi -vxi11 -usbtmc -testify

2018-08-22 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 22.8.2018 15:52, Manas Mangaonkar wrote: Thanks for the link,will do :) If you are going to take care of those packages, I'd appreciate if you remove the python2 bits from them. On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:15 Antonio Trande, > wrote: At this point, the pa

Help needed with FTBFS of package cpl in i686 and Fedora>=29

2018-08-22 Thread Sergio Pascual
Hello, I'm trying to fix a FTBFS bug in cpl, a C library. The package fails in i686 on Fedora>=29 and compiles in Fedora<=28 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29215071 https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5071/29215071/build.log I imagine that, after enabling SSE2 in

Re: [modularity] Managing module lifecycles — let's talk!

2018-08-22 Thread Owen Taylor
What are the possibilities for how a stream is maintained? The cases I can think of: * Indefinite - rolling forward with upstream - "master" "stable" etc. * Tied to an upstream version and it's EOL - a "2.1" stream of django * [less common] tied to a particular version of Fedora - the "29" str

Re: Intent to upgrade Django in f29 to 2.1

2018-08-22 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 22.8.2018 13:13, Matthias Runge wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:51:34AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 22.8.2018 10:59, Matthias Runge wrote: Hello, sorry for the late notice; Django 2.1 was recently released, and I intend to update Django in F29 to version 2.1. Apparently, all depending

Orphaning procedure for python-assimulo

2018-08-22 Thread Antonio Trande
Hello everyone. I'm leaving the maintenance of 'python-assimulo' package; if someone wishes take care of it, please reply here. Regards. -- --- Antonio Trande Fedora Project mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org' GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/

Fedora 29 compose report: 20180822.n.0 changes

2018-08-22 Thread Fedora Branched Report
OLD: Fedora-29-20180821.n.0 NEW: Fedora-29-20180822.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:7 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 7 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 66 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 38.07 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

2018-08-22 Thread Omair Majid
* Dan Horák [2018-08-22 03:55]: > a nice thing on Mono is that it is fully multi-arch, supporting all > Fedora arches. Won't be multi-arch problem for msbuild or .NET Core? Oh. Right, that would be a problem. .NET Core upstream essentially supports x86_64 only. arm-hfp, aarch64 and x86 are suppor

Fedora 30 Self-Contained Change proposal: No more automagic Python bytecompilation (phase 2)

2018-08-22 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation_phase_2 == Summary == See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation Now we are changing the default to be %global _python_bytecompile_extra 0. == Owner == * Name: Miro Hrončok (C

Fedora 29-20180822.n.0 compose check report

2018-08-22 Thread Fedora compose checker
Missing expected images: Atomichost qcow2 x86_64 Atomichost raw-xz x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 19/130 (x86_64), 5/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 268290 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/268290 ID: 268291 Test: x86_64 Server-d

Fedora 30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Make ambiguous python shebangs error

2018-08-22 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Make_ambiguous_python_shebangs_error == Summary == The /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-mangle-shebangs buildroot policy script will be changed to make the build fail when it sees an ambiguous python shebang, such as #!/usr/bin/python or #!/usr/bin/env python. (The sc

Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: New 128-bit IEEE long double ABI for IBM 64-bit POWER LE

2018-08-22 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PPC64LE_Float128_Transition == Summary == Transition IBM 64-bit POWER LE systems to the new 128-bit IEEE long double ABI. == Owner == * Name: Carlos O'Donell (codonell) * Email: car...@redhat.com == Detailed Description == IBM has designed a new long double

Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove glibc-all-langpacks from buildroot

2018-08-22 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_glibc-langpacks-all_from_buildroot == Summary == glibc-minimal-langpack is added to @Buildsystem group and installed into the minimal buildroot instead of glibc-all-langpacks. Packages which need more locales than plain C/C.UTF-8/POSIX need to pull the

Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Group_Tag == Summary == Remove the Group: tag from over 9000 source packages. == Owner == * Name: Jason Tibbitts (tibbs) * Email: ti...@math.uh.edu == Detailed Description == I will remove the Group: tag from all specfiles in Fedora dist-git which st

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 04:28:16PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Group_Tag > > == Summary == > Remove the Group: tag from over 9000 source packages. > > == Owner == > * Name: Jason Tibbitts (tibbs) > * Email: ti...@math.uh.edu > > == Detailed Descriptio

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Tom Stellard
On 08/22/2018 01:28 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Group_Tag > > == Summary == > Remove the Group: tag from over 9000 source packages. > > == Owner == > * Name: Jason Tibbitts (tibbs) > * Email: ti...@math.uh.edu > > == Detailed Description == > I will remo

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Omair Majid
* Ben Cotton [2018-08-22 16:38]: > 9420 source packages (43% of the total count) come closer to > compliance with Fedora's packaging guidelines. The Group: tag has > been in a "should not use" state since March of 2017. Can rpmlint be patched to warn about using the 'Group:' tag? Omair -- PGP

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: ZJ> Can we patch rpm not to show this useless line? In the context of what I wrote, there's no "useless line". I assume you're talking about rpm -qi output, but I was being more general than that. Certainly we wouldn't patch out the GROUP query

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Neal Gompa
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:00 PM Omair Majid wrote: > > * Ben Cotton [2018-08-22 16:38]: > > 9420 source packages (43% of the total count) come closer to > > compliance with Fedora's packaging guidelines. The Group: tag has > > been in a "should not use" state since March of 2017. > > Can rpmlint

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Artur Iwicki
If we remove the Group: tag from existing packages (assuming 100% accuracy), this would mean that the only way for a package to have the Group: tag would be to: a) have a maintainer add it back in b) accept a new package with the Group: tag present If we assume option a) to be unlikely, then wou

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Mikolaj Izdebski
On 08/23/2018 12:31 AM, Artur Iwicki wrote: > If we remove the Group: tag from existing packages (assuming 100% accuracy), > this would mean that the only way for a package to have the Group: tag would > be to: > a) have a maintainer add it back in > b) accept a new package with the Group: tag pr

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

2018-08-22 Thread Gerald Henriksen
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 13:59:51 -0400, you wrote: >* Dan Horák [2018-08-22 03:55]: >> a nice thing on Mono is that it is fully multi-arch, supporting all >> Fedora arches. Won't be multi-arch problem for msbuild or .NET Core? > >Oh. Right, that would be a problem. .NET Core upstream essentially >sup

Intent to drop python2-behave

2018-08-22 Thread Miro Hrončok
There is a cluster of PRs: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-behave/pull-request/2 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-docx/pull-request/2 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-parse_type/pull-request/2 That allows us to drop python2-behave as nothing will depend on it. I'm gi

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove the Group: Tag From All Packages

2018-08-22 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 23.8.2018 00:31, Artur Iwicki wrote: If we remove the Group: tag from existing packages (assuming 100% accuracy), this would mean that the only way for a package to have the Group: tag would be to: a) have a maintainer add it back in b) accept a new package with the Group: tag present If we

Re: Orphaning procedure for python-assimulo

2018-08-22 Thread Manas Mangaonkar
Hey, Kindly assign it to me. On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 23:32 Antonio Trande, wrote: > Hello everyone. > > I'm leaving the maintenance of 'python-assimulo' package; if someone > wishes take care of it, please reply here. > > Regards. > -- > --- > Antonio Trande > Fedora Project > mailto 'sagitter at

Why is i686 package missing from x86_64 updates repo?

2018-08-22 Thread Tom Stellard
Hi, I'm trying to resolve https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615016 and can't figure out why the i686 package is missing from the x86_64 updates repo. It is present in the fedora repo, so it seems like this issue is specific to updates. Does anyone know why this might be happening? Be

libgsf build help - MinGW edition

2018-08-22 Thread Greg Hellings
Recent versions of libgsf (since 1.14.43) have begun to fail to build in MinGW environments. The error is straightforward enough - a function signature definition differs between its forward declaration and its implementation. But I don't see any clear way that it differs. The same code compiles cl

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: New 128-bit IEEE long double ABI for IBM 64-bit POWER LE

2018-08-22 Thread Elliott Sales de Andrade
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 at 17:18, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PPC64LE_Float128_Transition > > == Summary == > Transition IBM 64-bit POWER LE systems to the new 128-bit IEEE long double > ABI. > > == Owner == > * Name: Carlos O'Donell (codonell) > * Email: car...@redhat.

Non-responsive maintainer for python-simplejson

2018-08-22 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
It hasn't been updated in over a year, and it's updates are sorely needed. Trying to get updated before the beta freeze. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462583 Joseph D. Wagner ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To un

Non-responsive maintainer for python-pytz

2018-08-22 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
It hasn't been updated in almost a year, and it's updates are sorely needed. Trying to get updated before the beta freeze. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508227 Joseph D. Wagner ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org T

Re: Why is i686 package missing from x86_64 updates repo?

2018-08-22 Thread Florian Weimer
On 08/23/2018 04:38 AM, Tom Stellard wrote: I'm trying to resolvehttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615016 and can't figure out why the i686 package is missing from the x86_64 updates repo. It's a bug in the generation of the updates-testing compose: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: New 128-bit IEEE long double ABI for IBM 64-bit POWER LE

2018-08-22 Thread Florian Weimer
On 08/23/2018 07:23 AM, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 at 17:18, Ben Cotton > wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PPC64LE_Float128_Transition == Summary == Transition IBM 64-bit POWER LE systems to the new 128-bit IEEE long

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180822.n.0 changes

2018-08-22 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20180820.n.3 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20180822.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:7 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 125 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 603.93 KiB Size of dropped packages:0