Bugzilla needinfo reminders

Hi, Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders about needinfo for over a year old bugs. Which is strange, as those bugs are closed. The notification are not really true, also. For example, bug …460 below is listed as 66 days old. I've filled it on 2018-07-09, which makes

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On Friday, October 25, 2019 9:11:39 AM CEST Tomasz Torcz wrote: > Hi, > > Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders > about needinfo for over a year old bugs. Which is strange, as those bugs > are closed. Bugzilla sends you notifications because the needinfo flag is set on

Re: Modularity and all the things

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:06:00AM -0400, Randy Barlow wrote: > On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 08:09 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > There's a very large difference between feedback like "I think the > > user experience is suboptimal here, for this reason" and "I don't > > like the entire design, you sh

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On 25. 10. 19 9:30, Kamil Dudka wrote: On Friday, October 25, 2019 9:11:39 AM CEST Tomasz Torcz wrote: Hi, Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders about needinfo for over a year old bugs. Which is strange, as those bugs are closed. Bugzilla sends you notifications b

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

>> Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders >> about needinfo for over a year old bugs. Which is strange, as those bugs >> are closed. I got them too :( > Bugzilla sends you notifications because the needinfo flag is set on you. > Why do not you simply clear the needinfo

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On 25. 10. 19 10:31, Marius Schwarz wrote: a) closing a bug for any reason, should clear the flag. it does not. It's not that simple. Sometimes, it makes sense to clear, sometimes not. Imagine closing a bug with needinfo and saying: "No answer for a month, feel free to reopen and answer the q

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

Am 25.10.19 um 10:36 schrieb Miro Hrončok: > On 25. 10. 19 10:31, Marius Schwarz wrote: >> a) closing a bug for any reason, should clear the flag. it does not. > > It's not that simple. Sometimes, it makes sense to clear, sometimes not. > > Imagine closing a bug with needinfo and saying: "No answer

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:52 AM Marius Schwarz wrote: > > Am 25.10.19 um 10:36 schrieb Miro Hrončok: > > On 25. 10. 19 10:31, Marius Schwarz wrote: > >> a) closing a bug for any reason, should clear the flag. it does not. > > > > It's not that simple. Sometimes, it makes sense to clear, sometimes

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:30:39AM +0200, Kamil Dudka wrote: > On Friday, October 25, 2019 9:11:39 AM CEST Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders > > about needinfo for over a year old bugs. Which is strange, as those bugs > > are clos

[Bug 1765386] perl-LWP-Protocol-PSGI-0.11 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765386 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2019-7633736fb1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7633736fb1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list f

Re: [HEADS-UP] maven 3.6 in rawhide next week

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 5:20 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hello Packagers, > > As some of you might not have been aware, the Stewardship SIG has been > busy keeping the Java stack in fedora alive and working. We're now > left with 0 build failures on all current branches of fedora for our > 235 p

Re: Bugzilla needinfo reminders

On Friday, October 25, 2019 11:02:00 AM CEST Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:30:39AM +0200, Kamil Dudka wrote: > > > On Friday, October 25, 2019 9:11:39 AM CEST Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > Few days ago (22nd Oct) I've started receiving daily reminders

Re: Modularity and all the things

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 2:43 PM Petr Šabata wrote: > While these issues are being resolved, we are considering temporarily > disallowing default streams in Fedora. I don’t want to abandon the > idea completely, as doing so reduces the motivation to actually build > modules and reap the benefits th

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On 24. 10. 19 13:30, Peter Robinson wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:48 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote: How do I find our why is Python 2 in the critical path? Does running scripts/get-critpath from the releng repo give any insight? No luck so far: $ python get-crit

Re: Modularity and all the things

I want to jump in on one part of this ... On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:40 AM Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > FXX: fish 3.x is non-modular, stream 4.x exists > FXX+1: fish 4.x is non-modular, stream 3.x exists > > * If user wants to stay on 3.x, he needs to enable stream

Re: FOSDEM

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 5:51 PM Geoffrey Marr wrote: > > I would also like to throw my name in the pot for FOSDEM; it would be a great > time to share and promote the Fedora Amateur Radio Sig that has been recently > getting a makeover. I'd be glad to help with setup/tear-down as well. Awesome!

Re: [Ambassadors] FOSDEM

I created a wiki page for FOSDEM 2020 [1]. Feel free to contribute and add yourself to the attendees list. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FOSDEM_2020 On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 6:24 PM Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: > > Hi All, > > I haven't heard anyone mention FOSDEM yet. Booth applications a

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On 25. 10. 19 12:23, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 24. 10. 19 13:30, Peter Robinson wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:48 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote:     How do I find our why is Python 2 in the critical path? Does running scripts/get-critpath from the releng repo give any ins

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On 25. 10. 19 13:17, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 25. 10. 19 12:23, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 24. 10. 19 13:30, Peter Robinson wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:48 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote:     How do I find our why is Python 2 in the critical path? Does running scripts/get-

Re: Modularity and all the things

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:29:23PM +0200, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: > I want to jump in on one part of this ... > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:40 AM Igor Gnatenko < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > FXX: fish 3.x is non-modular, stream 4.x exists > > FXX+1: fish 4.x is non-m

Re: Modularity and all the things

On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 09:43 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > That is true, but the wording used also implied that this design has > not been > considered. The question of whether other designs have been considered has been raised many times over the years, and I've not seen it claimed that yes,

[EPEL-devel] Re: Outstanding package requests for EPEL-8

All of the ones I've requested, I waited a few days to see if the maintainer would pick it up. And after that I asked if they would mind if I maintained it in EPEL8. About half of those the maintainer was fine with me maintaining the package in EPEL8. So, to answer your question, yes you can. On

Why Redhat and Fedora create rpms differently

Hi Just trying to get started with packaging. I started with a pretty big app, and looking through tutorials, it seems Fedora and Redhat use different ways to create rpms. I am a bit confused, seems complicated. Which one will work on Fedora? Some mentioned docs : Fedora: https://docs.fedorapro

Re: Why Redhat and Fedora create rpms differently

On 10/25/19 10:20 AM, Code Zombie wrote: Just trying to get started with packaging. I started with a pretty big app, and looking through tutorials, it seems Fedora and Redhat use different ways to create rpms. I am a bit confused,  seems complicated. Which one will work on Fedora? Some mentio

Re: Modularity and all the things

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 8:43 AM Petr Šabata wrote: > I do believe we all intend the best, even if we sometimes disagree. We > currently don’t have any other proposal that would fulfill the vision > of our Objective and the needs of our users. The input here helps us > re-focus on the most acute pa

Re: Why Redhat and Fedora create rpms differently

On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 10:32 -0400, David Cantrell wrote: > On 10/25/19 10:20 AM, Code Zombie wrote: > > Just trying to get started with packaging. I started with a pretty big > > app, and looking through tutorials, it seems Fedora and Redhat use > > different ways to create rpms. I am a bit confu

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 13:58 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > The critpath.py script from the same place is quite more interesting, as it > actually resolves the critpath on various architectures instead of querying > an > API where I already know python2 is listed in. > > With this patch: https:

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On 25. 10. 19 16:54, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 13:58 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: The critpath.py script from the same place is quite more interesting, as it actually resolves the critpath on various architectures instead of querying an API where I already know python2 is liste

Re: Why Redhat and Fedora create rpms differently

Dne 25. 10. 19 v 16:32 David Cantrell napsal(a): > On 10/25/19 10:20 AM, Code Zombie wrote: >> Just trying to get started with packaging. I started with a pretty >> big app, and looking through tutorials, it seems Fedora and Redhat >> use different ways to create rpms. I am a bit confused,  seems

Re: Modularity and all the things

Dne 24. 10. 19 v 14:09 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:45 AM Lukas Ruzicka > wrote: > > > > Are you proposing to _do_ those things, or proposing that > someone else > oughta? > > > This is an unfair statement! >

Re: How to figure out why is Python 2 in critpath

On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 17:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 25. 10. 19 16:54, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 13:58 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > The critpath.py script from the same place is quite more interesting, as > > > it > > > actually resolves the critpath on various ar

Orphaning eclipse-cdt

The eclipse-cdt package is being superseded by modules and it has missing dependencies such that it FTBFS so I am orphaning this project. -- Jeff J. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists

Re: Orphaning eclipse-cdt

Hey Jeff What do you mean by modules? Regards Mehdi On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:22 PM Jeff Johnston wrote: > The eclipse-cdt package is being superseded by modules and it has missing > dependencies such that it FTBFS so I am orphaning this project. > > -- Jeff J. > __

Re: Switching Maven and Ant to OpenJDK 11

On 25. 10. 19 19:30, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: Hello, Currently default Java runtime in Fedora is OpenJDK 8. This is not the latest OpenJDK packaged, but still remains system-default version. Because of that Apache Maven and Apache Ant in Fedora are built using OpenJDK 8 and run on OpenJDK 8. I a

Re: Orphaning eclipse-cdt

Hi Mehdi, See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/modularity/using-modules/ Eclipse packages are now being shipped as modules which have all dependencies for a particular Eclipse upstream version (e.g. 2019-06). In the past, you would install latest everything needed and no real easy way to go

Re: Switching Maven and Ant to OpenJDK 11

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 8:47 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 25. 10. 19 19:30, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Currently default Java runtime in Fedora is OpenJDK 8. This is not the > > latest OpenJDK packaged, but still remains system-default version. > > Because of that Apache Maven and

Re: Switching Maven and Ant to OpenJDK 11

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:30 PM Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 8:47 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > On 25. 10. 19 19:30, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Currently default Java runtime in Fedora is OpenJDK 8. This is not the > > > latest OpenJDK packaged, but

GNU IceCat Updates

Hello. I don't know if I'm right to ask this in this mailing list and if I should post this elsewhere, please forgive me bothering you. I believe GNU IceCat updates are not shipped to Fedora repositories and we're still using 60.9 version. How can I ask for updates or just remind maintainers about

Re: Orphaning eclipse-cdt

On 25. 10. 19 21:15, Jeff Johnston wrote: Eclipse packages are now being shipped as modules They are actually shipped both as modules and as nonmodules. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedor

[EPEL-devel] Re: giflib-devel

giflib-devel is a sub-package of giflib. It is already in RHEL8 and Centos8, just not in the BaseOS or AppStream repo's. For CentOS 8 it is in the PowerTools repo dnf config-manager --enable PowerTools On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 1:29 PM Mateo wrote: > > Hi EPEL developers. > > I am using Centos

[EPEL-devel] Re: giflib-devel

I have one more question. It will be the same situation with libgdiplus-devel? ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://doc

Fedora-29-updates-testing-20191025.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/2 (x86_64) ID: 476842 Test: x86_64 AtomicHost-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/476842 Passed openQA tests: 1/2 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-co

CPE Weekly Update: 2019-10-25

Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening Everyone, Welcome to week four of the CPE Weekly Updates! *Background: The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and maintained, bu

Re: Why Redhat and Fedora create rpms differently

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:40 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 25. 10. 19 v 16:32 David Cantrell napsal(a): > > On 10/25/19 10:20 AM, Code Zombie wrote: > >> Just trying to get started with packaging. I started with a pretty > >> big app, and looking through tutorials, it seems Fedora and Redhat >

Re: GNU IceCat Updates

On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 01:25:10 +0330 Alireza Hayati wrote: > Hello. I don't know if I'm right to ask this in this mailing list and > if I should post this elsewhere, please forgive me bothering you. > > I believe GNU IceCat updates are not shipped to Fedora repositories > and we're still using 60.

Need help with openvpn-auth-ldap

I've just updated openvpn-auth-ldap to 2.0.4 in rawhide and reconfigured it to build with the openvpn-plugin.h from openvpn-devel rather than a local copy (yeah, this was legacy from 2008). However, I no longer run openvpn-auth-ldap myself (at least, not on Linux) and don't really have a go

Re: Orphaning eclipse-cdt

On 10/25/19 1:30 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 25. 10. 19 21:15, Jeff Johnston wrote: Eclipse packages are now being shipped as modules They are actually shipped both as modules and as nonmodules. It definitely seems incomplete and broken at the moment: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/packa