On 04/15/2013 05:30 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> Is there any guidance as when to trim %changelog down to size? Some
> packages have thousands of lines of spec file dating back over 15
> years which seem kinda redundant now we're using git.
>
I've always seen the %changelog as a relic from times w
On 04/19/2013 09:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 19/04/13 06:16 PM, Alex G. wrote:
>> On 04/15/2013 05:30 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>>> Is there any guidance as when to trim %changelog down to size? Some
>>> packages have thousands of lines of spec file dating back o
On 04/20/2013 10:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 19/04/13 09:44 PM, Alex G. wrote:
>> I respectfully disagree with the assertion that the discussion is
>> circular.
>
> Sorry, not within this thread - but any discussion vaguely in this area
> inevitably winds up with
Hi,
I have 4 packages I'd like to get in before the Release of F19. For each of
these
slots, I'm offering to review a package of your choosing.
But wait, there's more! Choose your slot within 72 hours, and I will add, free
of
charge, a smiley face to the review of your package.
Supplies are li
On 05/05/2013 12:49 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 02:45 -0500, Alex G. wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have 4 packages I'd like to get in before the Release of F19. For each of
>> these
>> slots, I'm offering to review a package of your cho
On 05/05/2013 02:45 AM, Alex G. wrote:
Hi,
Billy Mays here with a special ml offer:
>
> I have 4 packages I'd like to get in before the Release of F19. For each of
> these
> slots, I'm offering to review a package of your choosing.
>
> But wait, there's more!
There's only one slot left! Only one! Oh n! Grab it before it's gone!
(fx2lafw)https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922246
Alex (under mentorship from ghost of Billy Mays)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 05/06/2013 02:49 PM, Eugene Pivnev wrote:
> Thanks.
> Ok.
>
> 06.05.2013 23:44, Sandro Mani:
>> On 06.05.2013 21:33, Eugene Pivnev wrote:
>>> 2 (two) trivial qt-based applicaions for sale:
>>>
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957333 - QuiteRSS - RSS/Atom
>>> aggregator
>>> https:
On 05/06/2013 10:17 PM, Alex G. wrote:
> And I'll take QuiteRSS in exchange for:
> (fx2lafw)https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922246
>
OOPS. I see it's already taken.
Alex
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 05/09/2013 09:46 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm looking for a packager to swap a review of
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=960771 with.
>
Me! Me! Me!! :P
I'll take it in exchange for
(fx2lafw) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922246
Alex
--
devel mailing lis
On 05/09/2013 02:06 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
>> They were already asigned but the reviewer told me that he has any
>> time to review them, so i reset them to sero.
>> It would be very nice if someone has the time and motivation to review
>> them.
>
> The usual way to deal with this
Hi,
I am working on a review
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924310), and I found the
use some unowned dirs. This would be OK, but it's not an isolated
problem. It turns out a few packages already in Fedora use unowned dirs.
$ yum provides /usr/share/mate/*
mate-menus-1.5.0-1.fc18.i6
On 07/01/2013 01:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2013-07-01 1:28, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> Since this topic comes up every few months, and no one's pointed
>> out the obvious answer yet, I'll say it:
>>
>> * Instead of making up more rules, make the tooling better so
>> we don't have to repe
On 07/01/2013 02:43 PM, Johannes Lips wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> Since this topic comes up every few months, and no one's pointed
>> out the obvious answer yet, I'll say it:
>>
>> * Instead of making up more rules, make the tooling better so
>> we don't have to repeat update descriptions
On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core
> server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not including d/l.
>
> I update my laptop which has an ssd (and MORE packages). Took 10-15 minutes.
>
I think this m
On 07/03/2013 12:15 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2013-07-02 21:42, Alex G. wrote:
>> On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>>> Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8
>>> core
>>> server, with a conventional disk drive. T
On 07/03/2013 03:23 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 07/03/2013 09:59 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> On 07/03/2013 07:42 AM, Alex G. wrote:
>>> On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>>>> Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8
On 07/10/2013 07:53 PM, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Jul, 2013 at 04:35:58 GMT, Alex G. wrote:
>> We shouldn't be surprised that update descriptions are crap. They are
>> just an annoyance for a lot of us, especially since we've put all that
>> information in a bu
Hi,
Epson distributes two drivers for its printers, espcr, and espcr2. espcr
is happily packaged in Fedora, however, newer printers seem to become
supported in espcr2.
The problem with espcr2 is that it is missing source code for an
internal library -- escprlib. escprlib is distributed as st
19 matches
Mail list logo
