Re: repos used by anaconda during Branched

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > Here's a bit of background: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962522 > > The key point there is that if we implement your b), the checkbox would > effectively do nothing in the pre-release phase at all, because there > are no

repos used by anaconda during Branched

I'll try to revive a discussion related to ticket #567 [1] and a previous test list thread [2] (I decided to start a new one to make the subject clearer and avoid the confusion from the initial email). During F29 development, we couldn't agree which repos should be enabled by default in anaconda

upgrade your libtaskotron virtualenv to python3

Hi taskotron developers, we've recently switched to using python3 by default in libtaskotron and all taskotron tasks. So if you have your local virtualenv to be used with libtaskotron, I suggest you re-create it with python3 [1] instead of python2, because that's how libtaskotron is going to get

Re: Proposal: Faster composes by eliminating deltarpms and using zchunked rpms instead

On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 11:13 PM Jonathan Dieter wrote: > For reference, this is in reply to Paul's email about lifecycle > objectives, specifically focusing on problem statement #1[1]. > > > Have rpm use zchunk as its compression format, removing the need for > deltarpms, and thus reducing

Re: Blocking criteria proposal: cron

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 1:31 PM Julen Landa Alustiza wrote: > We found a bug[0] on cron + selinux-policy that broke /etc/cron.d > readability for cron, resulting in a non working /etc/cron.d directory and > was proposed as blocker bug. > > During the blocker-review meeting, there was a majority

Re: Fedora Upgrade - release criteria update proposal

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 9:49 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > We have encountered a bug[0] which seemingly “broke” offline updates after > systems were upgraded from an older Fedora to Fedora 29 and had some > multilib packages installed. After the discussion at last week's Release >

Re: Fedora Upgrade - release criteria update proposal

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 9:49 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > We have encountered a bug[0] which seemingly “broke” offline updates after > systems were upgraded from an older Fedora to Fedora 29 and had some > multilib packages installed. After the discussion at last week's Release >

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #569: Proposal to redefine core applications.

On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 11:14 AM pmkel...@frontier.com < pmkel...@frontier.com> wrote: > > > I'd say an > > easy-to-read guide in "how can I help?" section on our wiki could be more > > visible. > > > > As one of the newbies (joined in March 2018) I will wholeheartedly say > Great Idea! I'm still

Re: [Test-Announce] 2018-11-12 @ ** 16:00 ** UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 6:13 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > # Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting > # Date: 2018-11-12 > # Time: ** 16:00 ** UTC > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) > # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net > > Greetings testers! > > We've got some

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #569: Proposal to redefine core applications.

On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 10:31 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > OK. First of all, it might be confusing that you used the same term "core >> apps" for something that might be a bit different, even though I see the >> logic. It's currently used just in Workstation, you mean distro-wide. They >> are not

Re: Bodhi update pushes are now automated

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:42 PM Randy Barlow wrote: > On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 08:07 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > The 'Autopush' happens when the update reaches the karma threshold. > > It > > > is not applied based on days in testing. > > > > That's what I thought. This seems bad

Re: Unretire recordmydesktop

On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 1:18 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > recordmydesktop was retired in F27: > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/4RCB6MBC4JVGG4SYLIKUDOOT2REGA6N4/ > > It's claimed that it doesn't work and is full of crash bugs, but I was >

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #569: Proposal to redefine core applications.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 4:40 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> *Actually, this might be a misunderstanding. The testcase is called >> *Workstation* core apps, and the technical specification wiki is in the >> *Workstation* namespace. The Workstation SIG have defined their core apps, >> and we have a

Re: Fwd: [fedora-qa] Issue #568: Proposal to split the Desktop Menus Testcase.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 9:21 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> My initial opinion is that it's not a useful idea, for two reasons: >> >> 1) Even with this split, automating any of this with openQA is *not* >> particularly easy, unless I'm missing something. App icons change, and >> the set of apps

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #568: Proposal to split the Desktop Menus Testcase.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 4:02 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > > >> Furthermore, I can't imagine how you'd make sure that *all* applications >> have been really tested, using OpenQA. Let's say there are 20 default >> applications in F29 Workstation, and you implement the test for all of >> them. If a new

Re: Fedora's OpenH264 repo issue

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 11:00 AM Jan Pokorný wrote: > Not sure where to report this for the Fedora side, but there seems to > be some synchronization issue regarding the built artifacts hosted at > http://ciscobinary.openh264.org, since older packages can be obtained > just fine: >

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #569: Proposal to redefine core applications.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:35 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello Fedora QA and friends, > > I would like to propose a change of what we define as core applications > because I feel that how it is done today is not sufficient. Let me explain. > > ## How it works today? > > The *core applications* are

Re: [fedora-qa] Issue #568: Proposal to split the Desktop Menus Testcase.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 10:44 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello Fedora QA and friends, > > the *Desktop Menus Testcase* is one of the most boring tests to do and it > would be nice if OpenQA could do it for us. However, how the testcase is > written, it cannot be automated because it relies on a

Re: Ideas for discussion (Issue #567)

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:48 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello, > I have been assigned to organize a discussion about this issue > https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/issue/567. > > I have thought about some possibilities (see lower or the issue) how the > behaviour should be defined. I would like you to

Re: Building Steam Proton on Fedora

On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 2:06 PM Dridi Boukelmoune < dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 5:15 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > I don't know how to build Proton and the people who reported Proton > works for them on Fedora are simply referri

Re: Building Steam Proton on Fedora

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:39 PM Dridi Boukelmoune < dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:21 PM Rex Dieter wrote: > > > > Steam is currently available from rpmfusion, fwiw/fyi/ymmv : > > https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/nonfree/steam.git/ > > It is, and as usual, thanks

Re: About dnf 4.0.4

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:37 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > Please nominate it as a blocker. > We already talked about it with the DNF team and I don't think there's any release criterion that this would violate. But they're trying to have it fixed before final release.

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:48 AM Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mi, 17.10.18 20:35, Zebediah Figura (z.figur...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > I do not, no. That number came up pretty early in testing, and I think we > > ended up leaving the limit at ~1M while testing other applications. On > the > >

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 7:34 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mo, 15.10.18 18:00, Kamil Paral (kpa...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:15 PM Lennart Poettering > > wrote: > > > > > On Di, 09.10.18 14:45, Anderson, Charles R (c...@wpi.edu

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:15 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Di, 09.10.18 14:45, Anderson, Charles R (c...@wpi.edu) wrote: > > > > It would be nice if somebody managed to find where this is patched in > > > Debian. Because I somewhat doubt that they made this change without a > > > proper

PSA: System update fails when trying to remove rtkit-0.11-19.fc29

Recently a bug in rtkit packaging has been fixed, but the update *will fail* on all Fedora 29 pre-release installation that have rtkit installed (Workstation has it for sure). The details and the workaround is described here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F29_bugs#rtkit-update

[Test-Announce] PSA: System update fails when trying to remove rtkit-0.11-19.fc29

Recently a bug in rtkit packaging has been fixed, but the update *will fail* on all Fedora 29 pre-release installation that have rtkit installed (Workstation has it for sure). The details and the workaround is described here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F29_bugs#rtkit-update

[Test-Announce] PSA: System update fails when trying to remove rtkit-0.11-19.fc29

Recently a bug in rtkit packaging has been fixed, but the update *will fail* on all Fedora 29 pre-release installation that have rtkit installed (Workstation has it for sure). The details and the workaround is described here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F29_bugs#rtkit-update

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM Germano Massullo wrote: > Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 15:46 Kamil Paral > ha scritto: > > That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started doing > basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the upgra

Re: package downgrades from f28 to f29

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:59 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > I haven't been able to find the documentation for this, but I seem to > remember that package versions should always be higher in newer fedora > releases (so there are no downgrades when upgrading from N to N+1). Is > this what is referred

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:29 PM Michal Konečný wrote: > Because this is mainly for Steam Proton I support the decision to raise > the limit only for Workstation. No need to do this on server edition. > I recommend to also raise this limit for Silverblue edition, because this > is targeted on

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:09 AM Michal Konečný wrote: > Maybe it will be also good to look at the SteamOS distribution and what > limits they are using. > According to the proton document [1], SteamOS also has an increased fileno hard limit. I haven't verified the actual value, but they

Re: raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 10:20 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: > I have thus prepared this a few days ago: > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/10244 This is great, thank you. So, any idea why they picked 1M? Are there typical apps that require > really that many? > I've emailed Zebediah

raise fileno limit to make Steam Proton / Wine+esync work well in Fedora

(cross-posting to devel and desktop lists, ideally reply to both) Hello, this is a request for feedback regarding adjusting process limits to make Steam/Wine work better on Fedora. *A quick background:* In August Valve announced [1] Proton [2], their own fork of Wine, to get included in their

Re: hibernation — does it work for you?

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 5:39 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > We have had a long discussion about hibernate (suspend to disk) > being unreliable. But there seems to be no hard data. Let's gather > some! > > If you perform hibernation (systemctl hibernate, or the

Re: F29: power notification on gnome lock screen, no journal messages

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 9:22 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > Crossposting > test@ > desktop@ > > Hi, > > I keep getting this weird behavior on Fedora 29 for which there are no > journal messages at all. This is the setup: > > > 1. on battery power > 2. Settings>Power>Blank Power = 5 minutes > 3.

Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 6:17 AM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 8:36 PM Harold Dost wrote: > > > > Is having this as a test criteria *that* burdensome? Similar to another > blocker that was being proposed, maybe it's not something that _must_ be > tested, but if it's known to be

Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 8:17 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 01:49:20PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > Justification: > http://newsthump.com/2018/05/21/man-decides-to-keep-box-of-cables-hes-has-since-2002-for-another-year/ > > More seriously: I don't think there are any

Re: Proposal to modify release criteria for fwraid

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 2:45 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 5:16 AM Petr Šabata wrote: > > > > > I hope this won't just mean we discover the problems later, in practice. > > > The policy of Fedora QA is to run all of the GA-blocking tests at Beta as > well. > My goal has

Re: Proposal to modify release criteria for fwraid

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 2:45 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 5:16 AM Petr Šabata wrote: > > > > > I hope this won't just mean we discover the problems later, in practice. > > > The policy of Fedora QA is to run all of the GA-blocking tests at Beta as > well. > My goal has

Re: fedora-review — do we have a maintainer?

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:31 PM Michal Novotny wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < > zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > >> f-r currently fails to build (#1603956), it has a bunch of bugs open [1] >> and many issues and unhandled pull requests in the upstream repo [2,

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 3:19 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > And > you're not quite correct about this. The way that DNF gets this value > is through identifying the package that provides "system-release" or > "distribution-release" and identifies the version set for the package. > That version is what

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 12:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I just don't think it's smart to drop the release number > > thing and the fedora-repos-rawhide package. > > The number will keep working too. We can make that an alias in > mirrormanager. So, for example if we had this implemented now and

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > This might surprise you, but I actually prefer the current way. It > makes activating Rawhide an explicit action that can stay carried > forward. It's going to stay explicit and persistent, as explained by Kevin. > This change makes no

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 31.7.2018 v 15:04 Kamil Paral napsal(a): > > In short, package managers on Rawhide would no longer replace > $releasever variable with a numerical value (like '29' at > > this moment, soon '30'), but with 'rawhide'

Re: RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > I'm somehow missing the point probably, but as a rawhide user, when I want > to take some package from F28 (typically kernel), then I have to do "sudo > dnf update --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=updates{,-testing} kernel\* > --release 28", i.e.

RFC: make $releasever return "rawhide" on Rawhide

Hello devel list, this is a request for comments for a recent proposal I filed at releng tracker: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7445 In short, package managers on Rawhide would no longer replace $releasever variable with a numerical value (like '29' at this moment, soon '30'), but with

Re: Rawhide groupinstall error

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Andre Robatino wrote: > Which component should a bug be filed against for the following Rawhide > error? > > [root@localhost ~]# dnf groupinstall basic-desktop-environment > Last metadata expiration check: 1:44:13 ago on Fri 27 Jul 2018 03:39:28 AM > EDT. >

Re: experiencing dnf Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' or ''updates'

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 20.7.2018 06:25, Michal Novotny wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I am occasionally experiencing the following error in my day-to-day dnf >> use: >> >> Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'fedora' >> >> or >> >> Failed to synchronize

Re: Please update rpmlint on taskotron

On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > All Python 3 packages now get bytceode related errors with Python 3.7. > > See for example https://taskotron.fedoraprojec > t.org/artifacts/all/7653ca56-8370-11e8-bbcf-525400fc9f92/ > tests.yml/python-libsass-0.14.5-1.fc29.log > > rpmlint was

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Jan Kurik writes: > > = Proposed System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HiddenGrubMenu >> >> >> Owner(s): >> * Hans de Goede >> >> >> On systems with only a single OS installed, the grub

Re: Taskotron test failures (dist.rpmlint)

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, rpmlint is the one that failed and only on two arches, that's why I > wanted it to be run again, just in case something was off the first time. I > thought that if library-without-ldconfig-postin

Re: Taskotron test failures (dist.rpmlint)

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I've just submitted an update to cmpfit[0] for f28. The automated tests > show errors and warnings only on x86_64 and armv7hl[1] and the errors have > to do with the omission of ldconfig

Re: Serious problem with SATA LPM in F28 on Lenovo 50 series laptops

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > I'm sending this to the fedora-kernel and -devel lists > both to get the kernel team aware of this and because it > is not entirely clear to me how to best deal with this. > > I guess we should get this

Re: git clone ... Permission denied

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Normand wrote: > Since today, I have a problem accessing the openqa git tree from pagure. > I do not understand what I am doing wrong. > > any suggestion ? > > === > $git clone -v

Re: media size criteria change proposal

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote: > This is related to KDE Live being oversize at Beta: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1561763 > which should have been a blocker, but it was agreed that we will change > criteria instead.

media size criteria change proposal

This is related to KDE Live being oversize at Beta: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1561763 which should have been a blocker, but it was agreed that we will change criteria instead. Here's a proposal for that change. Instead of current Beta criterion: "The release-blocking images must

Re: Criteria proposal: cover Server roles in upgrade criteria

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Preamble: I know we're planning to throw rolekit out entirely, but I > believe we're planning to continue to consider the actual functions > behind the roles (FreeIPA and postgres) as blocking, so I'd like to get >

Re: test matrices proposal: remove i386 section

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Adam Williamson <adamw...@fedoraproject.org > wrote: > On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 10:33 +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > > I propose we remove "Default boot and install (i386)" section from > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Inst

test matrices proposal: remove i386 section

I propose we remove "Default boot and install (i386)" section from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Installation_test_matrix We no longer have i386 references anywhere, just in that installation matrix. It has been an alternate arch since F26 and not blocking as an installation medium

Re: How to waiver no test results found?

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 1:28 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Dan Horák wrote: > >> >> I run >> waiverdb-cli -t dist.rpmdeplint -s '{"item": "qclib-1.3.1-3.fc28", >> "type": "koji_build"}' -p "fedora-28" -c "This is expected for

Re: Goodbye nvr.rsplit('-', 2), hello modularity

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 8:08 PM, Jan Kaluza wrote: > Your tool can use good old buildsys.build.state.change fedmsg with the > well known name/version/release fields like this: > > https://apps.stg.fedoraproject.org/datagrepper/ >

Re: Change in latest update – suspending

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > OK so Debian Sid has now fully updated GNOME and it behaves the same as > Fedora > > Rawhide. If you are not logged in on the console, GDM suspends the > computer > > after a few minutes. GNOME has just

Re: Test gate failures

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Hello, > > The "Test Gating" mechanism is preventing two updates from being pushed. > > * F27 Wine 3.3 >- "The update can not be pushed: no test results found" >-

Re: Multilib issue: apitrace-libs.i686 version mismatches apitrace-libs.x86_64 on F27

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > > > On 21.02.2018 15:16, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > >> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:34:48 PM CET Sandro Mani wrote: >> >>> # dnf update >>> [...] >>> Problem 1: package apitrace-libs-7.1-7.fc27.i686 requires apitrace =

Re: [Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2018-02-26 blocker review meeting

On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Silvia Sánchez wrote: > > Hi, > > It's depressing that there have been no meetings and so many difficulties > with compose, and the only meeting that took place I couldn't attend. > * sigh * > I had a couple of things to discuss, but I see

Re: qa-ansible - repo for PRs against fedora infra ansible

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > On 02/21/2018 05:54 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I've created a new project and cloned all Fedora Infra ansible into it: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/qa-ansible > > >

qa-ansible - repo for PRs against fedora infra ansible

Hello, I've created a new project and cloned all Fedora Infra ansible into it: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/qa-ansible The idea is to have a repo against which we can create a PR and review it comfortably. Once reviewed, the patch of course needs to go to the real infra ansible repo. But this

Re: Test gating enabled in Bodhi

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Fedorans! > > On Thursday, a new version of Bodhi was deployed that enabled Bodhi to > gate updates based on test results. You may notice a "Test Gating > Status" message in the right have side of the

Re: Making ResultsDB dumps public?

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Tim Flink <tfl...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:19:54 -0800 > Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > > On 01/11/2018 07:44 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@

Re: Making ResultsDB dumps public?

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > On 10/24/2017 03:36 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > > >> They should be there starting tomorrow. > >

Re: Release criteria proposals: Edition branding and installer customizations

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > sgallagh and I both noticed that the release criteria do not currently > include any requirements around Edition branding or installer > customizations. We think they probably should. Thus, we're proposing > the

Re: 2017-12-11 @ 17:00 UTC - Fedora 28 Blocker Review Meeting

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > # F28 Blocker Review meeting > # Date: 2017-12-11 > # Time: 17:00 UTC > # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net We have a Christmas party here, so Brno will not attend, sorry :)

Re: [Test-Announce] 2017-12-04 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > # Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting > # Date: 2017-12-04 > # Time: 16:00 UTC > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) > # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net > > Greetings testers! > >

Re: Release criteria proposal: clarify upgrade requirements

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:43 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! > > So at the most recent blocker review meeting, we discussed the intent > of the release criteria as regards upgrades. At present we have one > criterion, at Beta: > > "For each one of the

Re: Fedora-Easy-Karma Bodhi Errors

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Thu, 2017-10-19 at 20:24 +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > Unfortunately, yes, it needs to be changed in the script at the > > moment. > > I am currently considering options to fix this so the next update > > will > >

Re: Duplicated conflicting packages after failed dnf system-upgrade from 26 to 27

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote: > Hello guys. I was upgrading Fedora with the system-upgrade plugin from 26 > to 27. The upgrade process failed for unknown reasons (during the packages > installing), my computer rebooted and I'm not able to use my Fedora

Re: 2017-10-16 @ 14:00 UTC - Fedora QA Devel Meeting

Dne 16. 10. 2017 6:36 napsal uživatel "Tim Flink" : # Fedora QA Devel Meeting # Date: 2017-10-16 # Time: 14:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Qadevel-20171016 If

Re: [Test-Announce] 2017-10-16 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

Dne 14. 10. 2017 3:42 napsal uživatel "Adam Williamson" < adamw...@fedoraproject.org>: # Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2017-10-16 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! It's time

[Test-Announce] Proposal to cancel: 2017-10-09 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi, we'll be heavily focusing on F27 Final testing and I don't know about any urgent topic to discuss, so I propose we cancel this meeting. If you have any topics, please send them to test list and we'll discuss them there. Thanks, Kamil ___

[Test-Announce] 2017-10-09 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-09 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! There are currently some proposed release blockers, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time today, you can take a look at the proposed or

[Test-Announce] Proposal to cancel: 2017-10-09 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi, we'll be heavily focusing on F27 Final testing and I don't know about any urgent topic to discuss, so I propose we cancel this meeting. If you have any topics, please send them to test list and we'll discuss them there. Thanks, Kamil ___

[Test-Announce] 2017-10-09 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-09 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! There are currently some proposed release blockers, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time today, you can take a look at the proposed or

Re: Bodhi now has a "batched" request state

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:14 PM, Randy Barlow wrote: > Greetings fellow Fedora friends! > > bodhi-2.11.0[0] has been deployed to production, and this release > introduces a new state for updates where the request can be "batched". > The purpose of this state is to

Re: tracker-preferences

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > Upstream decision. > From the release notes of 1.99.0 - 2017-07-06: > " * Deleted tracker-preferences. Tracker has been using GSettings for > years, > so doesn't specifically require an UI for it, there's of course

Re: tracker-preferences

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Package is absent from F27. > How to turn off tracker now? > > Tracker miners running like mad as one of the first things when > demonstrating > a fresh install of Fedora to someone, is really bad. > Tracker seems

Re: Prioritizing different possible optimization work for composes

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > Hey, here's a question: if you had a choice to improve how the compose > process goes leading up to releases (beta or final), as a Fedora QA > person would you prefer: > > 1. Vastly increased speed of compose so we

F27 Final testing request #1

Hello everyone, please help us test important bugs before reaching F27 Final milestone. Here's a list of the most important ones: 1. system-upgrade fails to connect to online mirrors during upgrade when caches are missing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1492036 If somebody can

Re: Beta 1.5 and Virtualbox

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Ed Greshko <ed.gres...@greshko.com> wrote: > On 10/02/17 16:38, Kamil Paral wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Alessio Ciregia <alcir...@gmail.com > > <mailto:alcir...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > I'm u

Re: Beta 1.5 and Virtualbox

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Alessio Ciregia wrote: > I'm unable to use Fedora 27 beta 1.5 in Virtualbox: the screen (inside the > VM) become black. > I've not spotted this issue in previous composes. > Someone is aware of this issue? > Anyone who is able to reproduce

[Test-Announce] Proposal to cancel: 2017-10-02 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi, we'll be heavily focusing on F27 Final testing and I don't know about any urgent topic to discuss, so I propose we cancel this meeting. If you have any topics, please send them to test list and we'll discuss them there. Thanks, Kamil ___

[Test-Announce] 2017-10-02 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-02 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! There are currently some proposed release blockers, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time today, you can take a look at the proposed or

[Test-Announce] Proposal to cancel: 2017-10-02 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi, we'll be heavily focusing on F27 Final testing and I don't know about any urgent topic to discuss, so I propose we cancel this meeting. If you have any topics, please send them to test list and we'll discuss them there. Thanks, Kamil ___

[Test-Announce] 2017-10-02 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 27 Blocker Review Meeting

# F27 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-10-02 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! There are currently some proposed release blockers, so let's have a Fedora 27 blocker review meeting. If you have time today, you can take a look at the proposed or

Re: Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.5 Available Now!

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote: > > You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download > locations, and enter results on the Summary page: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_27_Beta_1.3_Summary

[Test-Announce] Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.5 Available Now!

Note: You can download the images from https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/27/Fedora-27-20170927.1/compose/ They'll be later copied to http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/27_Beta-1.5/ According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.5 is now available for testing. Please

[Test-Announce] Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.5 Available Now!

Note: You can download the images from https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/27/Fedora-27-20170927.1/compose/ They'll be later copied to http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/27_Beta-1.5/ According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.5 is now available for testing. Please

[Test-Announce] Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.3 Available Now!

According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.3 is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! For more information on release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage information for the

[Test-Announce] Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.3 Available Now!

According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Beta-1.3 is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! For more information on release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage information for the

Re: Using amdgpu as default for all GCN cards

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > Disclaimer: I am not a coder, just a graphic designer looking to improve > the entire AMD GCN cards from an AMD power laptop. > After seeing the improvement done on AMD support from the past years, one > step is

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >