Re: SPDX Statistics - Gold Rush Edition

Dne 18. 08. 24 v 6:50 dop. Richard Fontana napsal(a): As noted by Ben, in this case you can optionally simplify it to: Slightly side note for anyone wanting to play with expressions: There is a library `license-expression` that allows you to operate with boolean logic of SPDX expressions. And

Plan to orphan xapian-core/xapian-bindings

Hey Folks, I just realised I still maintain xapian-core/xapian-bindings, I haven't used them for years so it's probably better someone who actively makes use of them take them over. If anyone would like to take over before I orphan them ping me and I'll move the ownership over. They're a pretty l

How to contact Fedora Security Team

I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/ Per the documentation, I should contact the Fedora Security Team, but unfortunately the link provided in the documentation is no good: https:/

Re: How to contact Fedora Security Team

On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 8:16 AM Andrew Bauer wrote: > > I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this > policy: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/ > > Per the documentation, I should contact the Fedora Security Team, but > unfor

Re: How to contact Fedora Security Team

If you want to discuss smth not having security implications (e.g. CVEs) but crypto policies, this ML seems a proper place for it On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 2:16 PM Andrew Bauer wrote: > > I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this > policy: > https://docs.fedoraprojec

Re: How to contact Fedora Security Team

On 18/08/2024 14.22, Neal Gompa wrote: On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 8:16 AM Andrew Bauer wrote: I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/ Per the documentation, I should contact the Fed

Re: How to contact Fedora Security Team

Thanks everyone for the great responses. I'll certainly check out the Matrix room if I have to, but I was hoping I could do this in a way that allows me to directly reference any responses I get via link in the following new package request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2302646

Orphaning of python-case; PR’s to remove BuildRequires

I noticed that the python-case package was orphaned with a message,     Unmaintained upstream -- last commit upstream 7 years ago. No dependent package Now, this is not strictly true. Nothing depends on python-case at runtime, but it is a BuildRequires for four packages. However, all of thes

Re: Plan to orphan xapian-core/xapian-bindings

Hi Peter, I have already contributed to the Xapian project in the past (you can find my name in the AUTHORS file), I'm very familiar with the project, and I would be very glad to take over. Thanks Christiano On 18/08/2024 12.06, Peter Robinson wrote: Hey Folks, I just realised I still mai

[Test-Announce]2024-08-19 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora Quality Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2024-08-19 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: https://matrix.to/#/#meeting:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=chat.fedoraproject.org Greetings testers! It's meeting time again. Sorry it's been a

2024-08-19 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 41 Blocker Review Meeting

# F10 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2024-08-19 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: https://matrix.to/#/#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.io]=chat.fedoraproject.org Hi folks! It's time for a Fedora 41 blocker review meeting! We have 1 proposed blocker and 1 proposed freeze exception

Heads-up: python-aiohttp 3.10.3 coming to F42/Rawhide and F41/Branched

In one week, 2024-08-25, I plan to update python-aiohttp from 3.9.5 to 3.10.3[1] in F42/Rawhide and in F41/Branched. As noted in [2], there are some breaking API changes from 3.9.x to 3.10.x, so I have no plans to update F40, F39, or EPEL9. A COPR impact check[3] did not reveal any incompatibi

Heads-up: abseil-cpp 20240722.0 coming to F42/Rawhide and F41/Branched

In one week (2024-08-25), I plan to update the abseil-cpp package to 20240722.0[1] (Abseil LTS branch, July 2024) in F42/Rawhide and F41/Branched. This release breaks ABI with an SONAME version bump, and there are some small breaking API changes documented in the upstream release notes[2]. An

Re: Early adopting EPEL 10 in Fedora Copr?

Hello Michael, On pátek 16. srpna 2024 11:31:15, SELČ Michael J Gruber wrote: > Pavel Raiskup venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-16 11:06:21: > > On čtvrtek 15. srpna 2024 17:02:30, SELČ Michael J Gruber wrote: > > > Neal Gompa venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-15 16:14:30: > > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 9:45

Re: Orphaning of python-case; PR’s to remove BuildRequires

On 18/08/2024 18:20, Ben Beasley wrote: I noticed that the python-case package was orphaned with a message,     Unmaintained upstream -- last commit upstream 7 years ago. No dependent package Now, this is not strictly true. Nothing depends on python-case at runtime, but it is a BuildRequire