Absolutely no risk. It would be released as usual 0.6.37 (or number like
that) if not some ABI breakage due to removal of very old cruft.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018, 18:50 Jonathan Underwood On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 15:35, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > There was an announcement
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:05:44PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
>Dear all,
>It is now possible to use bodhi to release a new container build.
>Currently it is following the same flow as packages.
>After a successful OSBS build, a bodhi update can be created. Fedpkg does
>not yet
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
> Thanks for starting this discussion, Matthew!
>
> A few notes:
>
> * My personal long-term dream is that all Fedora users are running
> Silverblue, we do great automated QA testing, and upgrading from one
> Fedora to the next is a no
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:05:44PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
>
> This is a great news!
>
> Just to clarify for those like me who aren't playing with containers much.
> What happened before? There was no updates of containers at all?
> Assuming there was update, is this replacing the old workf
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:10:37AM -, Clement Verna wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:05:44PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> >
> > This is a great news!
> >
> > Just to clarify for those like me who aren't playing with containers much.
> > What happened before? There was no updates of cont
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1650041
--- Comment #3 from wyonen ---
Thanks, Petr!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubsc
* Matthew Miller:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 10:30:06PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> I love Fedora, but the idea that you can take a 3 year old Fedora and
>> put it out on the web is just bonkers. We don't have the manpower and
>> the procedures to make Fedora suitable for this kind
On 2018-11-14, Clement Verna wrote:
> After a successful OSBS build, a bodhi update can be created. Fedpkg does
> not yet support creating updates for containers [0], so you have to either
> use bodhi web UI or the bodhi cli. For example
>
> bodhi updates new --type enhancement --notes "cockpi
On 11/14/18 3:50 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
On 11/14/18 1:26 PM, Carmen Bianca Bakker wrote:
Je mer, 2018-11-14 je 18:34 +0100, Kevin Kofler skribis:
That is what make us different distro with its own user base. Want
the
very same but LTS system? try CentOS. Or RHEL.
+1. LTS Fedora is what C
On 11/14/18 3:56 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
On 11/14/18 5:29 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:32:14PM +0100, Adam Samalik wrote:
Do we have any user data about what "stability" means to users and
on what
different levels that can be achieved? Is it about app versions
such as
M
Hello!
Please, take a look to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1630466
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libtimidity/pull-requests
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.o
* Brendan Conoboy:
> Does Fedora remaining on the same kernel for a longer period of time
> open up useful opportunities? EG, if the same kernel were the default
> for a longer period of time would that help make it suitable for
> factory installs?
It would certainly help with factory installs w
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 5:44 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > Thanks for starting this discussion, Matthew!
> >
> > A few notes:
> >
> > * My personal long-term dream is that all Fedora users are running
> > Silverblue, we do great
* Przemek Klosowski:
> I wonder if RedHat could be persuaded to modify their process to adopt
> a Fedora release instead of forking it, and backport into that
> release---let's call it "Fedora LTS a.k.a. CentOS Release Candidate"
> (FLAC-RC :). It would require perhaps more effort on the part of
>
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 13:55, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2018-11-14, Clement Verna wrote:
> > After a successful OSBS build, a bodhi update can be created. Fedpkg does
> > not yet support creating updates for containers [0], so you have to
> either
> > use bodhi web UI or the bodhi cli. For example
On Wed, 14 Nov 2018 at 11:34, wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> Absolutely. Fedora once was a pretty solid end-user distro and fun-project
> for devs. Now it has become an unstable, experimental "bleeding edge" distro
> with a more and more balloning overhead
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 7:24 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> It's a new unknown feature of rpkg (and thus fedpkg) to let you
> configure `fedpkg build` to build packages for multiple koji targets
> at once from a single branch. If you choose to have a single "master"
> branch instead of a branch for eve
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:00 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 11/14/18 2:42 PM, John Florian wrote:
>
> > I still don't understand what makes updating these for a *new* release
> > significantly easier than an *existing* one. So let's just say GNOME
> > (or whatever) comes out next month with a new
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:02:59AM +0530, Milind Changire wrote:
> I'm a Gluster engineer and have joined the Fedora community with an effort
> to factor off the Glusterfs SELinux bits off the primary
> selinux-policy-targeted package. This factoring with help the distribution
Welcome! This sounds
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 6:47 PM Laura Abbott wrote:
>
> On 11/14/18 5:29 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:32:14PM +0100, Adam Samalik wrote:
> >> Do we have any user data about what "stability" means to users and on what
> >> different levels that can be achieved? Is it abo
Hello everyone!
I've been working on Java Mission Control. It's a profiling and diagnostics
tools for Java applications that was open-sourced by Oracle earlier this
year (along with Java Flight Recorder). The project is now under the
OpenJDK umbrella and I've been working on packaging it.
Please
On 2018-11-15, Clement Verna wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 13:55, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
>> On 2018-11-14, Clement Verna wrote:
>> > After a successful OSBS build, a bodhi update can be created. Fedpkg does
>> > not yet support creating updates for containers [0], so you have to
>> either
>> > us
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 07:48, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Matthew Miller:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 10:30:06PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >> I love Fedora, but the idea that you can take a 3 year old Fedora and
> >> put it out on the web is just bonkers. We don't have the manp
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:33:36 +, you wrote:
>The major OS competitor has moved to a 6 month release cadence, so that
>needs to be taken into account.
And Microsoft is experiencing troubles, and a lot of push back that
they are so far ignoring. Not all of the troubles are necessarily
from the
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 5:02 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> Make it cheap to maintain branches. I expect that one what to achieve
> this would be to build directly out of Git, with synthesized release
> numbers and changelogs. This way, you can apply a lot of fixes to
> multiple branches without enc
On Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:04:23 -0500, you wrote:
>From what I have talked with in the past.. 3 years is their bare
>minimum and 7 is their what we really want. It usually takes the
>vendor about 3-6 months of work to make sure the OS works on their
>hardware without major problems and then they want
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:38:12 +0100, you wrote:
>I understand this argument, but I think more and more desktop users
>are being trained that updates happen on a schedule they didn't choose
>and are hard to avoid. This is how most mobile operating systems
>function.
iOS prompts you for the yearly
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:37 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 07:48, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >
> > * Matthew Miller:
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 10:30:06PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > > wrote:
> > >> I love Fedora, but the idea that you can take a 3 yea
Matthew Miller píše v Út 13. 11. 2018 v 18:36 -0500:
> Hi everyone! Let's talk about something new and exciting. Since its
> first release fifteen years ago, Fedora has had a 13-month lifecycle
> (give or take). That works awesomely for many cases (like, hey, we're
> all here), but not for everyone
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:57:54AM -0700, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> One of the problems I've encountered with this approach is that the
> upstream Git repo links to (a lot of) submodules. If you're lucky
> those submodules point at Git repos and sha1s that don't disappear
> over time. It doesn't really
On 11/14/18 7:54 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 4:42 PM, John Florian
wrote:
I still don't understand what makes updating these for a *new*
release significantly easier than an *existing* one. So let's
just say GNOME (or whatever) comes out next month with a new major
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, at 10:57 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:57:54AM -0700, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> > One of the problems I've encountered with this approach is that the
> > upstream Git repo links to (a lot of) submodules. If you're lucky
> > those submodules point at Git r
Hi,
my name is Patrick Diehl a staff member at the Center for Computation
and Technology (CCT) at Louisiana State University. I am a contributor
to the C++ library for parallelism and concurrency (HPX) [0].
Since we released 1.2 of HPX, I like to propose a Fedora
package [1] for HPX.
My pgp keys
- Original Message -
> From: "Patrick Diehl"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 5:49:06 PM
> Subject: Self Introduction: Patrick Diehl
>
> Hi,
>
> my name is Patrick Diehl a staff member at the Center for Computation
> and Technology (CCT) at Louisi
> As can be clearly seen from the breadth of the update streams, once F+2
> is released, F+1 still gets a moderate number of updates, but F only
> gets major bugs fixed, at best. Some maintainers care more, some less,
> but it's pretty obvious that our "oldstable" release is not where the
> maintai
On 11/13/2018 04:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Hi everyone! Let's talk about something new and exciting. Since its
first release fifteen years ago, Fedora has had a 13-month lifecycle
(give or take). That works awesomely for many cases (like, hey, we're
all here), but not for everyone. Let's talk
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 9:40 AM Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, at 10:57 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > I think to do this we would need to have our own, controlled local git
> > mirror.
>
> This is step 2 in
> https://github.com/projectatomic/rpmdistro-gitoverlay/blob/master/doc/rewor
Gerald Henriksen píše v Čt 15. 11. 2018 v 10:22 -0500:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:38:12 +0100, you wrote:
>
> > I understand this argument, but I think more and more desktop users
> > are being trained that updates happen on a schedule they didn't
> > choose
> > and are hard to avoid. This is how m
Neal Gompa píše v St 14. 11. 2018 v 07:54 -0500:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 7:49 AM Kalev Lember
> wrote:
> > On 11/14/2018 11:35 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > If Fedora had longer life cycles, and more streams maintained in
> > > parallel, then I think the result would be that I end up doing
Hello,
Here's another simple python package that needs review for NeuroFedora.
Would someone like to swap reviews please?
python-nineml: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1649952
--
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD"
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: E
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, at 12:38 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> I am sorry to be such a noob, but I read the words on that page, they
> sound exciting, but I am lost. What does "mirror git repositories like
> rpmdistro-gitoverlay does" mean? I could use a really clear
> step-by-step walkthrough of how I
* Ken Dreyer:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 5:02 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Make it cheap to maintain branches. I expect that one what to achieve
>> this would be to build directly out of Git, with synthesized release
>> numbers and changelogs. This way, you can apply a lot of fixes to
>> multiple
On 11/15/2018 8:19 AM, John Florian wrote:
I totally agree, but we are talking about radical changes here and I
think we should keep all options on the table. If some particular
path forward is overwhelmingly desirable, that is the time to decide
if the push is worth it, not earlier IMHO. If
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:30 PM Colin Walters wrote:
>
> The doc does assume that the reader has some familiarity with
> the rpmdistro-gitoverlay project, yes. I'll look at tweaking that
> doc to mention looking at the toplevel README.
I looked at the top-level README but I gotta admit I was eq
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:22:16AM -0700, Greg Bailey wrote:
> beta appears to have multiple versions of php, perl, nodejs, and
> other packages. I've not yet used Fedora modules nor RHEL 8 beta,
> but I bring this up to see if that model meets the needs for Fedora
> users who are looking for some
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 06:55:45PM +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> That's my thinking, too. Having releases supported for 7 months is not
> really worth it, let's rather switch to a stable rolling release for
> those who want the latest and greatest. LTS will be there for the rest.
> And the rolling
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 10:45:26AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> He's proposing Debian-style source code forking into git repos and
> having the build description merged into that source tree. It's
> usually referred to as merged-source builds.
>
> Basically, we no longer use pristine sources as inpu
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:19:29PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I think the very, very high fast rate I'm seeing in the mirror stats (see
Too excited! "Very high fast upgrade rate." :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -
Hi,
I just released [1] new mock-core-config package which include new
rhelbeta-8-* configs.
This will allows you to build packages on top of RHEL 8 Beta. This is
temporary config. I put them there so you can experiment with your
builds and prepare for EPEL 8 once it will be available.
This config
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:10 PM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 06:55:45PM +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> > That's my thinking, too. Having releases supported for 7 months is not
> > really worth it, let's rather switch to a stable rolling release for
> > those who want the late
> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes:
MM> Let's talk about something new and exciting.
I assume that you mean "very much not new and about as exciting as the
fifteenth viewing of an episode of the Joy of Painting".
I know it's been a while. Maybe it's been long enough that a
significant number
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:18:35 +0100, you wrote:
>Also, I don't really understand where this need for a "fedora LTS"
>comes from. I've always thought of RHEL / CentOS as filling that role.
>I agree that there could probably be more collaboration between these
>three projects (especially CentOS and f
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 5:36 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
But there are some good cases for a longer lifecycle. For one thing,
this has been a really big blocker for getting Fedora shipped on
hardware. Second, there are people who really could be happily running
Fedora but since we don't check the
Well, I have read tons of things, and only one thing bump in my head:
"Ubuntu LTS"
I mean, it's a great idea, and a lot of people have asked about it in
forums, reddit, twitter, fedoraforums and the list goes on. I thing that if
someone can make it happens is the awesome Fedora Developers team, bu
On 11/15/18 10:42 AM, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
Gerald Henriksen píše v Čt 15. 11. 2018 v 10:22 -0500:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:38:12 +0100, you wrote:
I understand this argument, but I think more and more desktop users
are being trained that updates happen on a schedule they didn't
choose
and are h
55 matches
Mail list logo
