On Tuesday 12 January 2010 12:39:52 Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As you most likely know I've been steadily working on improving
> webcam support under Fedora. As you also might know I used to work
> at a Dutch University teaching Computer Science. I recently got a
> request from them if there w
-12/kde-
sig.2010-01-12-14.02.log.html
--
= Participants =
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Kevin Kofler
* Lukas Tinkl
* Rex Dieter
* Sebastian Vahl
* Steven Parrish
* Than Ngo
* Thomas Janssen
* Mary Ellen Foster
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 09:26:37 am Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On
08/03/2010 12:53 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > correct, git will share
objects between branches, so by storing in
> > different directories you'll
loose that advantage.
> >
> > I've got a shell prompt that shows me the
branch name
On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 12:01:37 pm Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Tue,
2010-08-03 at 09:43 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-08-01 at
09:24 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've been
wondering what's up with webkitgtk maintainership. It's
> > > pretty
important gnome
-03/kde-sig.2010-08-03-
14.04.log.html
--
= Participants =
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Kevin Kofler
* Rex
Dieter
* Steven Parrish
* Than Ngo
* Radek
Novacek
Hi all (and if not all, feel free to add them to CC).
I'd like to establish
WebKit SIG (or some sort of group of people interested in WebKit in Fedora -
no need for any official one) as it's quite an overhead to maintain such a big
beast here. We have QtWebKit, WebKitGtk, Chromium, KHTML... All ver
On Friday, August 06, 2010 05:15:12 pm you wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 16:45
+0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Hi all (and if not all, feel free to add
them to CC).
> > I'd like to establish
> > WebKit SIG (or some sort of group
of people interested in WebKit in
&g
On Friday, August 06, 2010 05:18:14 pm Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri,
2010-08-06 at 16:45 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > If you're interested in
- please reply,
> > I'd like to start Wiki page and we can talked about more
details
> > etc.
>
> Hey, thank
On Friday, August 06, 2010 04:45:39 pm Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> If you're
interested in - please reply,
> I'd like to start Wiki page and we can talked
about more details
> etc.
There is already WebKit page on Wiki [1] but I'd
like to use this one as the entry point
On Wednesday, August 11, 2010 04:28:07 pm Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2010/8/11 Andre Robatino :
> > Fedora 14 Alpha RC3 is now available [1]. Please refer to the following
> > pages for download links and testing instructions.
>
> I downloaded
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/night
On Thursday, August 12, 2010 10:19:57 am Martin Gieseking wrote:
> Am 12.08.2010 10:03, schrieb Peter Lemenkov:
> > It was easy to build whole list of upstream projects available in
> > Fedora - anyone could just look over the contents of this page:
> >
> > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpm
On Thursday, August 12, 2010 01:10:08 pm Chris Jones wrote:
> It is common for iso size to be over the 700MB target size due to most
> developers and testers doing their work in virtual machines these days.
> Therefore, iso size is not an issue. And bringing it back down to below
> the 700MB size l
On Friday, August 13, 2010 03:10:46 am Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > But FWIW, when it comes to KDE in particular, the whole thing is moot or
> > soon to be moot anyway because parts of KDE are now being redefined as
> > "critical path", resulting in even more annoying update policies, even
>
On Friday, August 13, 2010 03:26:11 am Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said:
> > IMHO, FESCo should be abolished, Fedora needs to be ruled by the SIGs!
>
> Why are you here?
To work? Not to play politics games? Kevin is really one of the top Fedora
contributors.
> All you
On Friday, August 13, 2010 01:27:18 am Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Luke Macken wrote:
> > Fixed in
> > https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/changeset/97b1a9d1f9ceecaaa2128837cc5bbd7f
> > 8e495f36
>
> That "fix" is really unhelpful and makes it a PITA to edit updates! In the
> past, KDE SIG has often edited in
On Thursday, August 12, 2010 09:33:17 pm Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 12.08.10 13:19, Mike McGrath (mmcgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > Since 2006 I counted 18 slips (I think one or two of those may just be a
> > single slip listed twice). Lets not yell, lets not flame war, lets not
> > point f
On Friday, August 13, 2010 05:09:17 pm Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Then we have to push broken updates, policy says so and it's ok, so let's
> > do it
> >
> > :(
>
> A policy requiring us to push something broken is broken. I
On Friday, August 13, 2010 07:21:50 pm Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 17:17 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Friday, August 13, 2010 05:09:17 pm Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > > > Then we have to push broken updates,
On Saturday, August 14, 2010 07:57:27 pm Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 19:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Martin Sourada wrote:
> > > I still remember the epic fail of having KDE 4.0 in stable fedora
> >
> > * I still think the KDE 4.0.3 we shipped in F9 wasn't that bad. We fixed
On Friday, August 20, 2010 10:46:43 pm Mahmoud Abdul Jawad wrote:
> Hi all,,
Hi!
> before two weeks, a discussion started in ambassadors mailing-list about a
> work around to deliver the important notifications to the fedora desktop
> (whatever the desktop is).
> after some discussion, we started
On Saturday, August 21, 2010 02:25:08 am Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > That would likely be a bad idea. Mandriva did something similar a few
> > years back, before I left, and it was pretty unpopular and often
> > confusing for users. I lost cou
On Friday, August 06, 2010 04:45:39 pm Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Just an update:
we hava our own WebKit SIG mailing list [1]. Feel free to subscribe.
[1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit
Thanks
Jaroslav
--
Jaroslav Řezník
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno
On Tuesday, August 24, 2010 06:26:52 pm Manuel Escudero wrote:
> 2010/8/24 Garrett Holmstrom
>
> > Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > > Reading this - I'm not sure all Fedora notifications should go through
> >
> > system
> >
> > > notifica
On Thursday, August 26, 2010 08:17:14 pm Mahmoud Abdul Jawad wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 06:30 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > I have to agree with Kevin here (!). Employing a notification system in
> > parallel to the ones already
-07/kde-
sig.2010-09-07-13.58.log.html
--
= Participants =
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Kevin Kofler
* Rex Dieter
* Steven Parrish
* Than Ngo
* Thomas Janssen
* Lukas Tinkl
* Radek Novacek
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 10:45:30 pm Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 22:21 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > This here sounds strange:
> > | The update rate for any given release should drop off over time,
> > | approaching zero near release end-of-life; since updates are primarily
>
On Saturday, September 25, 2010 09:03:08 pm Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:58:39 +0200
>
> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Not a very latest thing but more like - more useful thing. Because
> > some useful "user experience" changes could lead to better us
On Monday, July 25, 2011 04:43:37 PM Thomas Woerner wrote:
> Hello,
Hi Thomas!
> the features firewalld-default and network-zones will be postponed for
> Fedora-17. The features are not ready yet and also the integration into
> other projects. The network zone backend in NetworkManager is making
Hi!
- Original Message -
> In F16 and rawhide the PackageKit koji build is failing with "This
> file was generated using the moc from 4.7.2. It cannot be used with
> the include files from this version of Qt. (The moc has changed too
> much.)" when it gets to building the PackageKit-qt lib
As part of KDE Plasma Workspaces 4.7 [1] feature we updated Qt to the latest
Qt 4.8 (currently beta 1). It's already available in F16 branch and Rawhide.
And we hit several problems, so to avoid them...
1. always regenerate .moc files during build as moc generator can be changed
2. and it has cha
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Radek Novacek
* Than Ngo
* Rex Dieter
* Lukas Tinkl
* nucleo
= Agenda =
* KDE 4.7.1 status
* Qt 4.7.4 status
* Nepomuk startup warnings [1
On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:54:54 PM Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 12:46 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> > 2011/3/23 Marcela Mašláňová :
> >> On 03/22/2011 11:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> I wrote:
> The ticket is here:
> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4573
>
> >>>
On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 01:09:44 PM Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:54:54 PM Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> > On 03/23/2011 12:46 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> > > 2011/3/23 Marcela Mašláňová :
> > >> On 03/22/2011 11:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Lukas Tinkl
* Than Ngo
* Radek Novacek
= Agenda =
topics to discuss:
* NM 0.9 status
* f14/kde46 status update, [[SIGs/KDE/KDE46_for_Fedora_14
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 01:54:30 PM Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Heya,
>
> I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
> directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
> stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:05:27 PM Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Lukas Tinkl
* Than Ngo
* Radek Novacek
* nucleo
= Agenda =
topics to discuss:
* Fedora 15 status
* 4.6.3 status
* bluedevil drags in pulseaudio
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Lukas Tinkl
* Than Ngo
* Red Dieter
= Agenda =
topics to discuss:
* kde-4.6.3 status report
* QtWebkit
recent bugs:
= Summary =
4.6.3 status
Hi Adam.
On Thursday, May 19, 2011 12:48:04 AM Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hey, all. So, although the Fedora 15 final release has been signed off
> on, we gave ourselves a bit of wiggle room. The current Sugar
> implementation is known to have some significant issues, the major one
> of which is that
Hi,
we're going to import KDE Platform 4.7 to Rawhide soon but as upstream
reorganized tarballs, it's going to be a little bit more difficult (it's mess!)
and it means Rawhide is going to broken for a couple of days.
We were considering own build target but it's not going to be hopefully so bad
On Tuesday, May 31, 2011 07:32:07 PM Ward, David - 0663 - MITLL wrote:
> I'm following the procedure at:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
>
> Does anyone know how to contact Lubomir Rintel? He is not answering
> e-mails at his listed address or the foll
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Radek Novacek
* Than Ngo
* Red Dieter
* Thomas Janssen
= Agenda =
* 4.7 packaging status
* 4.6.4 status
* Lohit fonts accidentally disable the
On Tuesday, June 14, 2011 06:51:18 AM Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 08:14 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Henrik Wejdmark wrote:
> >> I have been with this distro since RH4 and have had a great time doing
> >> so. Almost every upgrade has been really smooth with only a few minor
> >> setbacks
On Monday, June 20, 2011 07:34:10 PM Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Due to the requirement for contributors to sign the FPCA by Thursday of
> last week, certain package owners who haven't yet signed will be removed
> from the packager group soon. When that happens, the packages that they
> own will be o
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 11:10:01 PM Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Each release, before branching, we block currently orphaned packages.
> It's that time again for Fedora 16.
>
> New this go-round is that we are also blocking packages that have
> failed to build since before Fedora 14.
>
> The follow
On Thursday 04 February 2010 20:18:53 Rex Dieter wrote:
> heads up for folks using rawhide/kde with nepomuk on their boxes,
> virtuoso-6.1.0 landed today, and it's data format is different than in the
> 5.x series.
>
> What this means, is that if you upgrade, your old nepomuk data will not be
> us
On Tuesday 09 February 2010 16:38:52 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard Hughes wrote:
> > I've been fixing upstream projects for weeks to build with
> > --no-[add]-needed. The list of projects that fail to build should be much
> > smaller now, especially for GNOME and Freedesktop stuff.
>
> 1. But have
On Thursday 11 February 2010 04:21:10 Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 03:15:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >Mat Booth wrote:
> >> If you insist on putting out major updates for released Fedoras it
> >> will never a good time to do a re-spin. Oh well.
> >
> >The updates being pushed s
On Thursday 11 February 2010 11:03:52 Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
> - "Kevin Kofler" wrote:
> > Sadly, this means this respin includes KDE 4.3.4 when 4.3.5 got pushed
> > to
> > stable on February 5 (in fact I queued it for stable on February 2,
> > but it
> > just missed a push and the next on
On Sunday 14 February 2010 04:58:52 Ryan Rix wrote:
> On Sat 13 February 2010 4:01:52 am Frode Nicolaisen wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Using the KDE version of fedora 12 and notice that the kplayer doesnt
> > play mp3s via samba/networkshares. It plays for some seconds and just
> > crash!
> >
> > Anyone
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Thursday 25 February 2010 07:46:21 Haïkel Guémar wrote:
> Le 25/02/2010 05:32, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
> > PS:
> > Running application X built against Qt 4.5.x with Qt 4.6.x SHOULD work.
> > Running application X built against Qt 4.6.x with Qt 4.5.x WILL NOT work
> > (and this is why pushing apps
On Friday 26 February 2010 14:32:16 Marcela Maslanova wrote:
> - "Josh Boyer" wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:14:13AM -0500, Marcela Maslanova wrote:
> > >- "Matthias Clasen" wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 13:16 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I think banning stable p
On Friday 26 February 2010 16:22:37 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Maybe some package rating included in PackageKit would be nice - for
> > stable packages it's indicator that this package is worth to install, for
> > testing package it would mean it&#x
Hi Martin,
see bug footer - This is autogenerated bugzilla, I'm sorry if the problem is
already fixed or reported. Additionally I apologize if that directory ownership
was requested earlier by some bugzilla (some directories were probably added
into filesystem package later, so your package shou
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
+ missing bug ;-)
Wacom tablet does not work in Qt
* https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569132
* wacom driver interface changed and broke Qt implementation
* than (with jreznik's help) is going to work on it
o LukasT offered his tablet to test it, KDE SIG lacks devi
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 08:05:23 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 08:02 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Why? Because you say so? We aren't doing that stuff now and things are
> > working just fine, thank you very much! We don't HAVE to change anything
> > at all!
>
> This I believe t
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 09:40:15 Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
> > On Wednesday 03 March 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 21:07 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 13:07:16 Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 16:23, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> [..]
>
> > BUT, Fedora was my choice BECAUSE i get/got the latest and greatest.
> > Even without running rawhide/factory/cooker.
>
> [..]
>
> Well, update to latest release (every 6 month) a
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 15:16:05 Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Thomas Janssen said:
> > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Jon Masters
wrote:
> > > My own personal opinion is that stable updates should only fix serious
> > > issues, or security problems. Fedora has such a short lifetime
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 15:55:18 Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Thomas Janssen said:
> > If you want RHEL, use it.
>
> People keep saying this, as if the opposite of "updates every day" is
> "release every 3 years". Those are two extremes, and there is a lot of
> space in between.
So
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 16:43:37 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 16:08 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > So why we can't use it as our advantage and fill this gap?
>
> We could very well fill that gap with rapid release cycles (every 6
> months) and updates
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 20:14:16 Peter Jones wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 01:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> >> In the end, I think the question is not about giving users what users
> >> want (be it frequent updates or stalled releases), but giving users
> >> what we see as a be
On Thursday 04 March 2010 13:05:36 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > Then I tried to start kmail to start working. It starts, asks
> > passwords, whines something about Akonadi which i don't use and
> > then crashes/exists.
>
> Not to mention that kaddressbook which
On Thursday 04 March 2010 13:13:18 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 05:13 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > This is exactly kind off stuff I don't have time now to solve,
> > since I need to work. If such upgrade would have been put to
> > next coming release, I could have upgraded when I have time,
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:01:29 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. "previous
> > stable", KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that
> > proposal.
>
> How i read it, you would still push
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
> > unofficial one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo
> > will pick up that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable wo
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:58:32 Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> >> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> > current stable release nor support
On Thursday 04 March 2010 17:33:20 Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 07:18 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/04/2010 07:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
> >> official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users
On Thursday 04 March 2010 22:13:05 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:59 -0700, Ryan Rix wrote:
> > The problem is that there _aren't_ bug fixes for these old releases. When
> > 4.x comes out, upstream pretty much drops development on 4.x-1 except
> > for security issues which are back
On Saturday 06 March 2010 19:38:16 Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> > 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
> >
> >> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
> >> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
> >> desktop)
> >
> > I think fo
On Friday 05 March 2010 18:37:06 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
> > As I had expected, breaking up the monolithic
> > packages into individual packages is a whole lot
> > of unnecessary work. Better to provide releases
> > as they occur, than to waste time unnecessarily
> > br
On Saturday 06 March 2010 23:48:23 Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> >> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in
On Monday 08 March 2010 10:41:18 Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/08/2010 11:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Major KDE update was in time of Fedora 9, so it's not an issue today.
> >
> > And this it the first problem - we should not call major, minor, bugfix
> > rel
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 06:05:32 Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
> >
> > My proposal is that we create a "Fedora User Survey" and create a link
> > on the fp.o website with a few very simple
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 13:55:53 Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Karel Zak wrote:
> > Always when I see that someone is trying to introduce a new rule I
> > have to ask myself ... why so large project like kernel is able to
> > successfully exist for 20 years without a huge collection of r
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 15:33:35 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 12:23 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
> > update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
> &
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:35:49 Dan Horák wrote:
> Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500:
> > On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > > Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
> > > update policies/target of Fedora
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
> > update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
> > our user
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:51:06 Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that
> > could be fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature
> > incomplete stuff in history...
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 15:57:05 Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> > We get the users we aim for.
>
> Not really true. We don't aim at all, and we only get the users that can
> bear to stay with us...
>
> > Here's the camps I see:
> >
> > 1. One gro
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Thursday 11 March 2010 09:59:46 pm Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:56:05 -0500
>
> Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > (And if the answer is "backport the security fixes to 1.8.1" then I'm
> > afraid I don't really have the skills nor have the time to spend on
> > such massive effort).
On Thursday 11 March 2010 07:36:34 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should be
> > done. Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in
> > another round of discussions (not th
On Friday 12 March 2010 04:54:43 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 14:56 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > How does this proposal go with upgrades? I think stable updates +
> > upgrades are tight together. Are we going to be more conservative in new
> > release
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Monday 29 March 2010 13:09:46 Christoph Wickert wrote:
> I am irritated by the way the KDE SIG and the KDE bugzappers handle
> bugs. For most bugs that are reported they demand the reporter to file
> an upstream bug report at bugs.kde.org and set the bug to NEEDINFO. If
> the reporter doesn't re
On Monday 29 March 2010 13:38:52 Oliver Falk wrote:
> I had similar issues already and I totally agree with Christoph!
> The maintainer should not redirect the bugreporter to the upstream
> bugreporting plattform. I already have plenty of accounts on upstream
> bugzillas because of exactly this...
On Monday 29 March 2010 14:03:51 Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
> 2010/3/29 Michał Piotrowski :
> > 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk :
> >> I had similar issues already and I totally agree with Christoph!
> >> The maintainer should not redirect the bugreporter to the upstream
> >> bugreporting plattform. I already have
On Monday 29 March 2010 13:57:54 Tim Waugh wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 13:35 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > The problem is - we can't act as man in middle - it's better when
> > original reporter is also upstream reporter = direct communication.
>
> Wait -- *
On Monday 29 March 2010 14:20:57 Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/29/2010 02:11 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > On Monday 29 March 2010 14:03:51 Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
> >> 2010/3/29 Michał Piotrowski:
> >>> 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk:
> >>>> I had similar issu
On Monday 29 March 2010 14:16:55 Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
> 2010/3/29 Jaroslav Reznik :
> > On Monday 29 March 2010 14:03:51 Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
> >> 2010/3/29 Michał Piotrowski :
> >> > 2010/3/29 Oliver Falk :
> >> >> I had similar issues already an
On Monday 29 March 2010 15:13:56 Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 15:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > But still bugs are fixed by program developers not Fedora developers.
>
> IMO 'Fedora developers' (really, what you mean here are packagers, I
> guess) should strive to become
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 01:56:56 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> > I don't think there's ever an absolute answer to this question.
> > Sometimes it makes more sense for the original reporter to report
> > upstream - in which case the maintainer s
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 04:26:12 Linuxguy123 wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 13:09 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > I am irritated by the way the KDE SIG and the KDE bugzappers handle
> > bugs. For most bugs that are reported they demand the reporter to file
> > an upstream bug report at bugs.
On Wednesday 31 March 2010 12:26:17 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 03:45 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> > which will make fixing bugs in current even more important.
>
> Not at all. Either the bug is important to fix in the current release
> or it is not. Telling users to get it from Rawhide w
1 - 100 of 907 matches
Mail list logo
