Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Benson Muite
Hi Ranjan, Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages. On 5/14/23 03:27, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Thanks, Kevin! No  problem, no rush, I did not quite know what to expect, > hence the questions. Thanks again! > > It seems it is just the review that is needed: https://do

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Sandro
On 14-05-2023 00:45, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Thanks, Sandro! How does one ping in the ticket on paguire? The easiest way is to just leave a comment in the ticket. If you need info from a specific person you would tag that person (@fas_user). That ensures people watching the ticket queu

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Globe Trotter via devel
Benson, Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some additional review that is needed? Best wishes, Ranjan On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 05:41:35 AM CDT, Benson Muite wrote: Hi Ranjan, Thanks for contributing to Fedora and maintaining packages. On 5/14/23 03:27,

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Sandro
On 14-05-2023 12:40, Benson Muite wrote: It seems it is just the review that is needed: The re-review is done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025138 Releng unretiring the package is the next step, really. -- Sandro ___ devel mailing l

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Benson Muite
Ranjan, On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some > additional review that is needed? > Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. It seems to have been unretired: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11417 Though

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230514.n.0 changes

2023-05-14 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230513.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230514.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:4 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 15 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 2.38 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Fedora 38 EPEL 9 - python3-pydot-1.4.2-6.el9.noarch python3-soupsieve-2.4.1-1.el9.noarch missing depedecies ...

2023-05-14 Thread André verwijs via devel
Fedora 38 EPEL 9 python3-pydot-1.4.2-6.el9.noarch python3-soupsieve-2.4.1-1.el9.noarch missing depedecies ... Issue 1: Unable to install the best update candidate for package python3-pydot-1.4.2-5.fc38.noarch - nothing offers python(abi) = 3.9 which is needed for python3-pydot-1.4.2-6.el9.

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 02:04:57PM +0300, Benson Muite wrote: > Ranjan, > > On 5/14/23 13:46, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > > Thanks! The package was cleared  on BZ some time ago. Is there some > > additional review that is needed? > > > Sorry, that is correct. Usually state is set to post. I

[Test-Announce] 2023-05-15 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

2023-05-14 Thread Adam Williamson
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2023-05-15 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat Greetings testers! It's meeting time again! If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this email and

Re: F39 Change Proposal: Flatpaks without Modules (System-Wide Change)

2023-05-14 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 07:33:56PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > I'm concerned that this is just like Software Collections with a > different path, which I believe where previously banned in Fedora (and > are generally a huge hassle on the releng side, I think). The main sticking point with Softw

Re: F39 Change Proposal: Flatpaks without Modules (System-Wide Change)

2023-05-14 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 09:04:40PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > So, why having all those "Fedora Containers" releases in Bodhi which > > follow Fedora branches? Isn't just one Fedora Containers release enough? [...] > The "F38 Flatpaks" release in Bodhi represents Flatpaks built with the F38 > pac

Re: review swaps

2023-05-14 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 12:17:09AM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > Hi Zbigniew, > > > On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 11:55 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > I have a bunch of nice python packages looking for a reviewer: > > > > #2121902 pyinstrument - Python profiler with colorful ou

Re: Review request for oclock package (orphaned since F35)

2023-05-14 Thread Globe Trotter via devel
Kevin, oclock was not updated, and Beson's email made me realize that I could go an do it myself. I did that by the time you check. slim's was updated and both packages are now in testing. Best, Ranjan On Sunday, May 14, 2023 at 10:49:44 AM CDT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sun, May 14, 2

Re: Fedora 38 EPEL 9 - python3-pydot-1.4.2-6.el9.noarch python3-soupsieve-2.4.1-1.el9.noarch missing depedecies ...

2023-05-14 Thread Samuel Sieb
On 5/14/23 07:33, André verwijs via devel wrote: Fedora 38 EPEL 9 python3-pydot-1.4.2-6.el9.noarch python3-soupsieve-2.4.1-1.el9.noarch missing depedecies ... Issue 1: Unable to install the best update candidate for package python3-pydot-1.4.2-5.fc38.noarch - nothing offers python(abi) =

Re: F39 Change Proposal: Flatpaks without Modules (System-Wide Change)

2023-05-14 Thread Milan Crha
On Wed, 2023-05-10 at 09:30 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > Does that sound workable? Are there better ways we could do it? Hi, if I recall correctly, using the custom D-Bus prefix is there to match application's D-Bus prefix defined for the flatpak, thus: a) the services run independently fro