Fedora-Cloud-33-20211010.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20211009.0): ID: 1021777 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Fedora-Cloud-34-20211010.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211009.0): ID: 1021793 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Reasons to subscribe to the package-announce list?

Hello, Package Maintainer Docs currently recommend joining the package-announce mailing list in two places [1,2], describing it as follows: > You should also consider joining the package-announce mailing list —  > The commits mailing list gets notifications on all commits in any > package in t

[Test-Announce] Fedora 35 Branched 20211010.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 35 Branched 20211010.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20211010.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211009.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211010.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:5 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 8 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

Fedora 35 compose report: 20211010.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-35-20211009.n.0 NEW: Fedora-35-20211010.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 3 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded

Fedora-IoT-35-20211010.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211008.0): ID: 1022178 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1022178 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests comple

Re: Reasons to subscribe to the package-announce list?

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:14:06PM +0300, Otto Urpelainen wrote: > Hello, > > Package Maintainer Docs currently recommend joining the > package-announce mailing list in two places [1,2], describing it as > follows: > > > You should also consider joining the package-announce mailing list —  > > Th

Fedora-IoT-36-20211010.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 1/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20211007.0): ID: 1022542 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1022542 ID: 1022557

Fedora-Rawhide-20211010.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Xfce raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 1 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 7/206 (x86_64), 7/141 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fe

Fedora-35-20211010.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 7/204 (x86_64), 6/141 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20211009.n.0): ID: 101 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/101 ID: 1022234 Test:

Re: F36 Change: Retired Packages (Self-Contained Change proposal)

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes: > On 07/10/2021 17:45, Ben Cotton wrote: >> Subpackage `remove-retired-packages` has been created (subpackage of >> `fedora-upgrade`). > > I suggest integrating this functionality into dnf as a plugin. > > Example: > sudo dnf clean-retired --releasever=32 This so

Re: Onboarding package

Kevin Fenzi writes: > Another possible way we could do this is have this setup in our staging > env. ie, they do the same things, but it's in staging (which we never > compose anyhow). That has the danger of something being broken in stg > without us realizing it, or them diverging. +1 on having

Re: Onboarding package

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes: > On 05/10/2021 18:04, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> So we need a real proposal with an end to end idea of what >> is being done, what is to be learned, and how it is to be 'watched' by >> real developers to make sure people are learning things. > > Maybe we can

Re: Reasons to subscribe to the package-announce list?

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:14:06PM +0300, Otto Urpelainen wrote: > Hello, > > Package Maintainer Docs currently recommend joining the package-announce > mailing list in two places [1,2], describing it as follows: > > > You should also consider joining the package-announce mailing list —  > > The

Re: I think we should stop building i686 packages we're not shipping

On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 12:53 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > This is an off-shoot thought of the 32-bit ARM conversation. Right now, > we > build stuff like libreoffice for i686, but then (mostly) don't ship it. > This seems like a waste of resources and time. > > I know it's somewhat complicated (f