Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:02:32AM +, Ben Boeckel wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > feh > > vifm > > I'll take these. > Done. pgpyLHXy8u7GF.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:00:43AM +0530, Arun SAG wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > >webattery > > > > I will take this. > Done. Note that this package has branches for EPEL5 and EPEL6. I've orphane

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:35:03PM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > I'll take atop too. > > Done. atop has branches for EL-4, EL-5, and EL-6 which I've now orphaned. Feel free to pick them up in the packagedb if you're interested in EPEL: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/atop -Toshio

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:56:44PM -0700, Peter Gordon wrote: > I'll take dejavu-fonts. I'd really hate to see my favorite font package > get stale. :) > Done. -Toshio pgpgloMoa59QR.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.o

Re: systemd: bugreports for missing service-files

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:27:16PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: > On 06/21/2011 12:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > > > > Am 21.06.2011 07:23, schrieb Alexander Kurtakov: > >> I wonder how could someone would put a deadline on volunteers? > >> You can't :) > > > > oh in the thread "Packages

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:02:07AM +0200, Petr Sabata wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:34:10AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > perl-Config-Simple > > perl-Font-TTF > > perl-Ham-Reference-QRZ > > perl-Makefile-DOM > > perl-Net-SMTP-SSL > Done. Note that pe

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:22:48AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > I'll take: > > >adanaxisgpl > >zvbi > Done. > And I've also taken the liberty of sending a personal mail to > nim (Nicolas Mailhot) pointing out that he needs to sign the new CLA, > to stop all the font packages he is the

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 05:13:40AM -0400, Jaromir Capik wrote: > Hi. > > May I take the apache-commons-collections ? > > Thanks :] > Done. pgpNg69xvsBLu.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:01:55AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:34:10AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > libcmpiutil > > libvirt-cim > > I'm trying to contact the maintainer to get them to sign > FCPA asap. Failing that I'll fin

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:38:09PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 20.06.11 17:02, Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > mod_dnssd > > I should probably take this, as I am upstream of this package. > Done. Thanks. -Toshio pgpZ4OQdfD43S.pgp Descr

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:27:51PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > I would like to takeover ruby* > > Thank you. > Done: rubygem-heroku rubygem-mail rubygem-mustache rubygem-railties rubygem-tzinfo have been reassigned to you. -Toshio pgp8vSG4ziLDZ.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel ma

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:44:23AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > qoauth > > qjson > > qwt > > qwt-doc > > I'll take these. > Done. Thanks -Toshio pgpXkhgJuIfj4.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mail

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 08:24:08AM -0600, Ken Dreyer wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > cronolog > > I'll take this. > Done. cronolog also has EL-5 and EL-6 branches. I've orphaned those if you'd like

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 02:10:53PM -0300, Domingo Becker wrote: > 2011/6/20 Toshio Kuratomi : > > transifex > > As I co-maintain this, I'm interested in becoming the maintainer. > Done. Thanks. -Toshio pgp9oM319o26m.pgp Description: PGP signature -- d

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:46:54PM -0400, Deji Akingunola wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:34 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 f

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:54:50PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Montag, den 20.06.2011, 10:34 -0700 schrieb Toshio Kuratomi: > > Due to the requirement for contributors to sign the FPCA by Thursday of last > > week, certain package owners who haven't yet signed will

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:30:42AM -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > On 20/06/11 10:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > gdesklets-goodweather > > gdesklets-quote-of-the-day > I contacted Owen Taylo, current owner, and currently wait for his reply. > I am co-maintainer of tho

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:59:52PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > libcgroup > > I'll take this one if it isn't already grabbed. > Done. Thanks Josh. -Toshio pgpT70h8aEKKc.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:26:11PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 17:02 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > sound-theme-freedesktop > > If nobody else picks this one up, I'll take it. > Done. -Toshio pgpuWlb4nI3SE.pgp Description: PGP signat

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 08:56:02PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > stp > > tex-zfuzz > > zenon > > Since nobody else has spoken for these, I'll take them, but > comaintainers would be very welcome. &g

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 02:32:46PM +0200, Fabian Deutsch wrote: > Good day, > > > dbh > > libmatheval > > muParser > > I'll take those, if they ain't taken. > Done. Note that muParser has EL-4, EL-5, and EL-6 branches that I've now orphaned. If you want to take them, feel free to log into the

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 07:34:47AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > > > > > xcowsay > > I'll take this too. > Done. -Toshio pgpXt4TeSNtpr.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:41:20PM +0200, Radek Novacek wrote: > > krusader > > I'll take this if it's not already taken. > Done. -Toshio pgpoeIbR58OVp.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 06:49:00PM -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > On 21/06/11 04:35 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:30:42AM -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > >> On 20/06/11 10:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >>> gdesklets-goodweather &g

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 09:46:17AM -0700, Dan Young wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > python-werkzeug > > I'm packaging python-flask, which has python-werkzeug as a dep. I'll take it. > Done. Note that python-werkzeug has EPEL-4

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:27:35AM -0400, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote: > Hi, > > if no other is interested, I can provide new home for these: > > espeak > Reassigned to you, thanks! > libax25 > demorse > linpsk > LinLog > bjensen has now signed so these are no longer orphaned. You're welcome to ap

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 02:00:40PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > Hi, I'll take these. > > kde-plasma-ihatethecashew > kde-plasma-translatoid > > libaccounts-glib > libaccounts-qt > libqttracker > > For MeeGo stack, I'll take these, I did review for most of them. > > We (as KDE SIG) should

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 02:53:47PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:34:10AM -0700, 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

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0300, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 06/22/2011 03:12 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > xerces-c > > I can take xerces-c if its current owner doesn't sign the FPCA. I sent a > personal mail to jrobie yesterday but no reply so far. > Done.

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:50:01AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > espeak > jskarvad had already taken this. I've made you a comaintainer. > flite > HippoDraw Done. > > olpcsound > > > This package has long been dead and I thought it had been killed. It looks > like > it o

Re: Packages that will be orphaned

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 04:19:51PM +0800, Robin 'cheese' Lee wrote: > I can take kbibtex. > Done. -Toshio pgpC4NtEUSZxO.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Fedora rawhide FTBFS status 2011-06-16 x86_64

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:38:15AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 07:17:45PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > virt-mem-0.3.1-9.fc12 (build/make) rjones,virtmaint > > This is a dead.package, or if it's not then it's supposed to be dead. > Please follow the steps on: http:/

python-argparse changing license

I've just pushed python-argparse-1.2.1 to EPEL5 and EPEL6. This should be a backwards compatible change. It does, however, change licensing from Apache-2.0 to Python. Python license is more permissive than Apache license and is GPLv2 compatible (where Apache is not) so this shouldn't cause anyon

Re: R: Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.

On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:31:18AM +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote: > Hi folks, > > Thanks all for the input. I didn't realize the subject was *this* > controversial. I did find the other discussion thread[1] which was aimed > at completing the draft I had linked to, and as you'll notice it was > inconcl

Re: OpenMPI, Emacs and libotf problems

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 04:46:46PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > For rpm >= 4.9, there's __provides_exclude and __provides_exclude_from > > which I believe don't have those problems. > > > > http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/DependencyGenerator#

Re: Development only package?

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 10:06:56AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > I'm working on making a package of OpenImageIO[1] which is used by a > new branch of blender, blender-cycles[2], which uses the cycles > rendering engine[3]. > > There appears to be one bundled library, pugixml[4] but it's only 3 > fi

Re: Development only package?

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 12:46:37PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > Ok, another question. I edited the CMakeLists.txt and changed the > "STATIC" to "SHARED" and it compiled without issue creating a shared > library. Is there any down side to doing this? > > I guess now I have something for the pugixml

Re: Development only package?

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 01:50:34PM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > > What about the case where the upstream tarball is not directly capable > of generating a dynamic or static library? > This would not be a guarantee that it is okay to bundle the library. It would be one indicator but not the most

Re: I'll take auto-destdir

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 01:37:15PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Jerry James wrote: > > The package auto-destdir was recently orphaned due to a maintainer > > that didn't sign the new agreement.  One of my packages BRs it.  I > > tried to take it myself in pkgdb, but

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages in F-16

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 05:04:51PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 03:28:59PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Orphan ip6sic > > I've used this from time to time. I'll pick it up. > > > Orphan minicom > >comaintained by: jcapik > > If something is orphaned, but has

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages in F-16

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 05:04:51PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: >  > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 03:28:59PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >  > >  >  > Orphan ip6sic >  > >  > I've used this from time to time. I'll pick it up. > > So I took maintainershi

Re: Sindre Pedersen Bjørd al is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:45:30PM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:15 PM, Christoph Wickert < > christoph.wick...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Sindre Pedersen Bj rdal was declared to be MIA in a fast track > nonresponsive maintainer procedure [1, 2]. This means that

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 04:42:28PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > This is an excellent example. Ford has several audiences and several > products. Now, imagine a world where Ford is forced to only produce one > product. That's the world we're in right now. Lots of different people, > lots of d

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 06:33:52PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 04:42:28PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > > > This is an excellent example. Ford has several audiences and several > &g

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 07:52:55PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 05:16:14PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:11:47PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > >> The way things are now "works" because of status quo. We tell anyb

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 07:56:53PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 05:33:02PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 04:16:30PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> > > >> > &

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 06:29:33PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 17:07 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > An interesting note here is that target audience is of no use in deciding > > this. KDE and GNOME aim for the same target audiences but have different >

Re: REMINDER: Re: Sindre Pe dersen Bjørda l is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:43:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Just a reminder here folks. If you take over an orphaned package, > please remember to check for any open bugs on the package and > re-assign them to yourself. This won't happen automatically, so you > will need to make sure and do it m

Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

Commitee members present abadger1999 hansg tibbs racor rdieter SmootherFrOgZ Committee members absent rathann limburgher (technical difficulties) spot (parental duties) We approved two guidelines: SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros For: 5 hansg, Smooth

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:55:25PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 13:28 -0800, Jesse Keating a écrit : > > On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:19 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > A side-effect, is that spec parsers that read the file in a buildroot > > > which is missing the

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > The committee started voting on new Guidelines for python modules that > includes Guidelines for python3 but suffered network difficulties in the > middle of the discussion. This will ocntinue on the packaging

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 11:48:52PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 23:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : > > adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent "complex" font package > > but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order > > in all fo

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 10:26:05AM +0100, Till Maas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:20:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > That would probably avoid the koji display problem but is sure to > > > introduce packaging bugs. The macro call has been put in this particula

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 11:49:46AM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > Le Jeu 4 février 2010 10:26, Till Maas a écrit : > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:20:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >> > That would probably avoid the koji display problem but is sure to > >> > int

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 11:26:22PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > No, my argument is that the problem this tries to protect against is > purely cosmetic, and is cosmetic in an area which has little practical > importance. That makes it very low in my priority scale. Nevertheless I > would suppo

Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros > > Did we consider fixing the bug in RPM/the packaging sy

Re: Xerces 3.0.1 is now built - retire Xerces 2.8?

On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 03:07:40PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote: > Jonathan Robie wrote: > > I have built Xerces 3.0.1 for Rawhide. Xerces 3.0.1. was released in > > February, 2009. > > > > I think it should replace Xerces 2.8, which was released in August, > > 2007. Do any packages require Xerc

Re: rawhide report: 20100208 changes

On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 02:19:41PM +, Rawhide Report wrote: > fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5 > fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_system-mt.so.5 > fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_program_options-mt.so.5 > f

Re: documentation on Bugzilla bug lifecycle/developer procedures?

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Eric Smith wrote: > The unifdef package had become orphaned due to an FTBFS, > . I took it over, > updated it to the latest upstream code, verified that it builds with > Koji, and committed it. I'm not

Re: No lzma sdk in fedora

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 03:04:06PM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > > > Where is an appropriate location to put the source? > > The Fedora upx package put its copy of lzma465.tar.bz2 as another file in > the SOURCES for Fedora upx, in same directory as upx-3.04.tar.bz2. > This is a bundled library an

Re: No lzma sdk in fedora

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 07:39:36PM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > On 02/12/2010 04:08 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 03:04:06PM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > >> The Fedora upx package put its copy of lzma465.tar.bz2 as another file in > >> the SOUR

Re: Fedora rawhide FTBFS status 2010-02-10 x86_64

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 07:28:34PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:50:29 -0600, Matt wrote: > > > sylpheed-3.0.0-3.0.beta7.fc13 > > (missing_DSO_to_linker__http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking) > > itamarjp,cwickert,mschwendt > > How is packa

Draft of maintainer and sponsor responsibility policies

At the last fesco meeting we talked about the ramifications of allowing any person in the packager grop to commit to packages and decided that rather than having more accounts and acls on to manage this, that it was desirable to change the responsibilities of sponsors and maintainers. The goal is

Re: Fedora rawhide FTBFS status 2010-02-10 x86_64

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 02:50:35AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:04:33 -0600, Matt wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 02:06:06PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 07:28:34PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > >

Re: Draft of maintainer and sponsor responsibility policies

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 09:03:37PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_sponsor_responsibilities%28draft%29 > > It says "package sponsor" in the URL, in the heading and in the second > paragraph. I think it

Re: Draft of maintainer and sponsor responsibility policies

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:20:08PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 02:08:36PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > packager group. We want to encourage more sponsors to take on people that > > are > > not yet good packagers but have the

Re: help for fixing Fedora rawhide FTBFS

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 03:16:20PM +0100, Zoltan Kota wrote: > Hi, > > > zkota: bazaar,recode > > Could you help me to fix the issues raised for the above packages? > > > http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/FixBuildRequires/mock-results/x86_64/bazaar-1.4.2-14.fc13.src.rpm/result/build.log > Ar

Re: help for fixing Fedora rawhide FTBFS

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 08:33:29AM +0100, Zoltan Kota wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/FixBuildRequires/mock-results/x86_64/bazaar-1.4.2-14.fc13.src.rpm/result/build.log > > > > > Are we ready to retir

Re: Unblocked orphans

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > There are still a few orphans which are unblocked due to dep issues. > Please somebody take ownership of these: > > Unblocked orphan gtk-sharp > > Orphan: gtk-sharp >    avahi-ui-sharp requires mono(gtk-sharp) = 1.0.0.0 >    avahi-ui-sharp r

Re: Why online recovery in pgpool is disabled?

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 06:26:53PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > Is there any particular reason why online recovery is disabled in F11 > pgpool-II? > > Online recovery is a very important feature (fundamental, must have) > and I have to build pgpool-II just to enable it. Can't it be

Re: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:04:55AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: > > You clearly want to be able to push whatever, whenever (see massive KDE > updates in supposedly "stable" releases). Others have shown that > playing fast and loose with updates has consequence

Re: Worthless updates

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:07:29PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote: > > Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but > > here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these > > functions aren't actually deprecated i

Re: Worthless updates

On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 01:00:54PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said: > > It's quite similar to our KDE stability proposal [1] - (from F13 released > > POV) > > F11 eol, F12 stable with security and bugfix updates and F13 current > > version > > with lat

Re: Worthless updates

On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 11:58:23AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:16:05AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > > > 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 pro

Re: [HALL-MONITORED] Update threads are now hall-monitored

On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: > On 03/03/2010 04:40 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > On 03/03/2010 04:30 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: > >> So while I agree that some of the posts where people are simply > >> attacking other people need to stop, I can't agree that this t

Re: Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:47:28AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > On one hand we have people complaining about the quality of updates, on the > > other hand we're happily releasing crap we know is broken. > > It's an *alpha*. 'Crap we kn

Re: Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:01:42PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:22 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:47:28AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > &

Re: Fedora 13 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting: 2010-03-04 @ 01:00 UTC Recap

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:05:29PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 15:53 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > To give a practical example, if 'KDE X.Y with shiny new IM client' is > > > listed as a feature for the Alpha, we'd say the

Re: To semi-rolling or not to semi-rolling, that is the question...

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:52:56AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Make rawhide consumable as a semi-rolling release itself. > > We already have this it is called early branching of the next release. I > would fully agree with you if it were not for the early branching > feature, which means we ef

Re: how to make things better(tm)

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 05:10:41PM +, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 03/05/2010 03:25 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote: > > > > Well, no. It wouldn't be a very hot leading distro. It would be > > nothing more than any other distro with the same release-cycle. > > Assuming that other distros were packaging

Re: how to make things better(tm)

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:55:23PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Orcan Ogetbil (oget.fed...@gmail.com) said: > > There is one more thing. Very important thing. We have been pushing > > KDE releases asap so far, and although it hurt me at times (at school > > and at work), I like it. I don't blam

Re: how to make things better(tm)

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 10:27:53AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:07 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > And since I was lost at the previous step, I wonder here what you think > > Thomas wants that's rather specialized. If you think it's "dr

Re: Limited options in bugzilla

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:39:00PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:35:55 +0300 > Tareq Al Jurf wrote: > > > So what should i do, fas is registered to my gmail, while bugzilla is > > registered to @fedoraproject.org > > i saw some other guys which have their bugzilla registered t

Re: Another great update

On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:07:13PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Most of our packagers follow the guidelines from the wiki: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_guidelines > This means, they apply at least three criteria: > * An update should not break something > * An upd

Re: Provide more testing feedback (was: Re: Refining the update queues/process)

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:32:11PM +0100, Till Maas wrote: > can be packaged. Another obvious TODO is to get bodhi_update_str() > included in the bodhi client in fedora-python. > I'll be happy to take that patch. Looking like I'll be pushing out an updated python-fedora next week. Depending on th

New version of PackageDB in staging

Hello all, The first beta of the new PackageDB is running in our staging environment now. https://admin.stg.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/ All the features for 0.5.x should be present but there's definitely bugs to be found in the implementation. When you across one, feel free to find me on IRC to

Re: Another great update

On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:32:42PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > > I don't really care for desktop programs here. If you want to upgrade > X.org or OpenOffice - I probably don't notice it. But if you plan to > upgrade things like python, php - it can be a problem for me. > On the python side,

Re: Another great update

On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote: > > > >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >> >> > >

Re: Another great update

On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:03:57PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > My reason to comment on those threads on devel list is really just that I > want to retain the freedom to decide when my updates are ready to be > released. I'm responsible for giving them adequate testing. Users > expect the packa

Re: Another great update

On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 11:02:46AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > >> > On Sat, 6

Re: Update question: some user data

On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:04:03PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > > It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only > > > > That's the first time you've suggested it's poorly

Re: Another great update

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 12:27:07PM +0200, Juha Tuomala wrote: > > > > On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > >> Yes, it can get confusing. I think it was Kevin Kofler who suggested to > >> talk about "feature releases" vs. "bugfix releases" instead > >> to avoid confusion. > > > > Again yo

Re: Another great update

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:24:24PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't > > confirm this. I thought that releng was asking for the overrides t

Re: howto group push?

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 08:51:12AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 08:28:29AM -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > >leigh scott wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 08:20 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> > >>> The maintainers should coordinate, and one of them should bundle both > >>> pack

Re: Proposed udpates policy change

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco > meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions > regarding whether updates in stable releases should be expected to > provide features

Re: Proposed udpates policy change

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:12:11PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:21:45PM +0100, Sven Lankes wrote: > > > > If Fesco is aiming at getting rid of all the pesky packagers maintaining low > > profile packages: You're well on your way. > > So, no, that's not the intent and

Re: Another great update

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 02:05:05PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 16:32 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > That's the page for releng's actions in response to a buildroot override > > request. I'm looking for where it's documented when to ask

Re: Proposed udpates policy change

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:28:45PM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > The future > > -- > > > > Defining the purpose of Fedora updates is outside the scope of Fesco. > > However, we note that updates intended to add new functionality

Re: Proposed udpates policy change

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> 3) Sufficient testing of software inherently requires manual > >> intervention by more than one individual. > >> > > This isn't

Re: Proposed udpates policy change

On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 07:55:03PM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > You're willing to say that if I update one of my packages that has a script > > of 30 lines, is a leaf node, and the update is to give the script an &

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >