#222: L10N Test Day
---+
Reporter: noriko| Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 16
Component: Test Day | Version:
Resolu
#222: L10N Test Day
---+
Reporter: noriko| Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 16
Component: Test Day | Version:
Resolu
As FESCo doesn't have its own mailing list, and this isn't a trac item
exactly as I'm not really requesting any *action* on FESCo's part, I'm
sending this to devel and test in the hopes it reaches all parties
concerned. This relates mainly to the feature process and hence is of
particular interest
The following Fedora 14 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/phpMyAdmin-3.4.3.1-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-7.4-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.4-2.git20110622.fc14
https://admin.fedorap
The following Fedora 15 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal7-7.4-1.fc15
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libpng10-1.0.55-1.fc15
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/phpMyAdmin-3.4.3.1-1.fc15
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
#222: L10N Test Day
---+
Reporter: noriko| Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 16
Component: Test Day | Version:
Resolu
Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) said:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 07:39:39 -0500,
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > This looks to be the third day in a row without a rawhide composes.
> > Is there any information available on what is happening?
> > Are there build logs like there are for the nightly
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 08:10:55 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> I had a raidem rebuild fail because the aclocal command wasn't found.
> There is a build-requires on automake, but the root log doesn't show automake
> being included in the mock environment.
I didn't read the output carefully eno
I had a raidem rebuild fail because the aclocal command wasn't found.
There is a build-requires on automake, but the root log doesn't show automake
being included in the mock environment.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 07:39:39 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> This looks to be the third day in a row without a rawhide composes.
> Is there any information available on what is happening?
> Are there build logs like there are for the nightly live image composes?
Looks like it did rebuild to
This looks to be the third day in a row without a rawhide composes.
Is there any information available on what is happening?
Are there build logs like there are for the nightly live image composes?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/m
On 07/14/2011 12:11 PM, James Laska wrote:
> To make sure I'm understanding, do you mean the next goal would be to
> determine the status of the SysV->systemd feature and whether it will be
> on track for a Beta TC1 target? If it isn't ... FESCO must decide
> whether to hold the release, or drop t
On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 11:31 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 07/14/2011 11:16 AM, James Laska wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 20:58 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >> On 07/13/2011 08:11 PM, James Laska wrote:
> >>> Quite a bit smaller than the 100+ bugs on the list. Was that de
On 07/14/2011 11:28 AM, James Laska wrote:
> Long story short, I agree it makes sense to keep this separate from the
> blocker process.
Agreed as well
The sysv to systemd feature is a special case and should not be mixed
into the standard QA workflow.
The QA community should be aware of how imp
On 07/14/2011 11:16 AM, James Laska wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 20:58 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 07/13/2011 08:11 PM, James Laska wrote:
>>> Quite a bit smaller than the 100+ bugs on the list. Was that decision
>>> from a recent FESCO meeting?
>> It's the one held on 15 June.
>
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 18:36 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 19:25 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 07/13/2011 07:17 PM, James Laska wrote:
> > > Your ideas are consistent with how we've handled this before, I don't
> > > think I could have articulated nearly as wel
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 20:58 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 07/13/2011 08:11 PM, James Laska wrote:
> > Quite a bit smaller than the 100+ bugs on the list. Was that decision
> > from a recent FESCO meeting?
>
> It's the one held on 15 June.
>
> See this thread on -devel [1] also note
17 matches
Mail list logo
