OLD: Fedora-eln-20241108.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20241109.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 18
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
On 08. 11. 24 15:44, David Bold wrote:
The policy is applied:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RROZC3KFCF6G4RRMKEM4NXJ4PTFFROTT/
The question is, why is rubygem-hashie not on the list ...
That's a good question.
Because it is not in Rawhide r
OpenImageIO 3 has been released and I plan on building in the next few days.
The following packages are affected:
$ fedrq wr -F "name" -s OpenImageIO-devel
blender
embree
luxcorerender
oidn
openshadinglanguage
usd
I will build in a side tag for Rawhide only unless someone has a compelling
reason
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20241107.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20241108.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 11
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 81
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 11.04 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 08:51:47AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Hot news:
> * 24311 spec files in Fedora
>
> * 30967 license tags in all spec files
>
> * 360 tags are not SPDX complient (number from line bellow minus packages
> with LicenseRef-Callaway-*)
>
> * 2658 tags have not been convert
Is this policy applied? Checking rubygem-hashie [1, 2], the answer is
likely 'No' or there is something broken. But the policy page [3] also
does not list recent tracking bugs, so the former is likely the case.
Can we reinstate it again?
Vít
[1]:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bu
The policy is applied:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RROZC3KFCF6G4RRMKEM4NXJ4PTFFROTT/
The question is, why is rubygem-hashie not on the list ...
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec
