Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping LXDM
[2013-09-11 08:56:42 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > On 2013-09-11 00:53, Allan McRae wrote: > > Also "thanks to its developers and recent changes in package" and > > "during 2 years since last release" make zero sense taken together. > > What exactly doesn't make sense? The fact that LXDM is based on > ConsoleKit and even with git patch is unable to utilize logind correctly? Upstream seems pretty active; do you mean that all the problems we have with our package are still present in git master? If not, we should try to convince upstream to make a release - and if they are not willing to we can always package a git snapshot. Cheers. -- Gaetan pgpkUvuG8Xxb4.pgp Description: PGP signature
[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 8 fully signed off packages * 33 packages missing signoffs * 14 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * gummiboot-37-1 (i686) * gummiboot-37-1 (x86_64) * postgresql-9.3.0-2 (i686) * postgresql-9.3.0-2 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (9 total) == * dialog-1.2_20130902-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * efibootmgr-0.6.0.138.1132342-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * gummiboot-37-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libusbx-1.0.17-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dialog-1.2_20130902-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * efibootmgr-0.6.0.138.1132342-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * gummiboot-37-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * libusbx-1.0.17-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * systemd-206-3 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (24 total) == * archboot-2013.08-3 (any) 0/2 signoffs * cogl-1.14.0-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-59 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * nvidia-325.15-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * nvidia-304xx-304.108-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * postgresql-9.3.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * postgresql-old-upgrade-9.2.4-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * qemu-1.6.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * transcode-1.1.7-12 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * upower-0.9.21-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xfce4-power-manager-1.2.0-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xfce4-session-4.10.1-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xulrunner-23.0.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * cogl-1.14.0-5 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-59 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * nvidia-325.15-6 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * nvidia-304xx-304.108-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * postgresql-9.3.0-2 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * postgresql-old-upgrade-9.2.4-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * qemu-1.6.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * transcode-1.1.7-12 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xfce4-power-manager-1.2.0-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xfce4-session-4.10.1-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xulrunner-23.0.1-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (8 total) == * linux-firmware-20130903-1 (any) * pambase-20130821-1 (any) * linux-3.11-1 (i686) * syslinux-6.01-4 (i686) * systemd-206-3 (i686) * linux-3.11-1 (x86_64) * syslinux-6.01-4 (x86_64) * upower-0.9.21-1 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (14 total) == * syslinux-6.01-4 (i686), since 2013-07-29 * syslinux-6.01-4 (x86_64), since 2013-07-29 * upower-0.9.21-1 (x86_64), since 2013-07-31 * upower-0.9.21-1 (i686), since 2013-07-31 * xfce4-session-4.10.1-3 (i686), since 2013-08-03 * xfce4-session-4.10.1-3 (x86_64), since 2013-08-03 * xfce4-power-manager-1.2.0-5 (i686), since 2013-08-03 * xfce4-power-manager-1.2.0-5 (x86_64), since 2013-08-03 * cogl-1.14.0-5 (i686), since 2013-08-12 * cogl-1.14.0-5 (x86_64), since 2013-08-12 * qemu-1.6.0-1 (i686), since 2013-08-19 * qemu-1.6.0-1 (x86_64), since 2013-08-19 * pambase-20130821-1 (any), since 2013-08-21 * archboot-2013.08-3 (any), since 2013-08-23 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. bpiotrowski - 3 signoffs 2. dan - 2 signoffs 3. tpowa - 2 signoffs
[arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
Hey guys, Since I don't know where to put this, please please PLEASE stop assigning me to bugs/feature requests/etc. related to the bugtracker. Just because I maintain the home page doesn't mean I maintain everything web related. I have 0% interest in maintaining Flyspray, migrating to a new platform, etc. It looks like we do need someone to do this; so if anyone knows someone that is willing to take a crack at getting us off the antiquated system we are using, I can at least help get some database dumps, etc. Thanks! -Dan
[arch-dev-public] Fwd: I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
Forwarded. Thanks for the offer, we'll see what people think. -- Forwarded message -- From: Nowaker Date: Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:51 AM Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster To: dpmc...@gmail.com It looks like we do need someone to do this; so if anyone knows someone > that is willing to take a crack at getting us off the antiquated system we > are using, I can at least help get some database dumps, etc. > Do you guys feel like using Atlassian JIRA for bugtracking? Since I run a JIRA hosting company, I may host and admin a JIRA for you. If you like the idea, I would ask Atlassian for a free open source license for Arch Linux and perform a migration so no bugreports are lost. Just let me know if you are interested. (Replied directly to you Dan, because I'm not allowed to arch-dev-public. You may forward my reply to arch-dev-public to trigger the discussion. Thanks). -- Kind regards, Damian Nowak StratusHost www.AtlasHost.eu
[arch-dev-public] Fwd: Re: I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
Forwarding. Can someone approve Leonidas to post to this list? -Dan -- Forwarded message -- From: Leonidas Spyropoulos Date: Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 9:10 AM Subject: Fwd: Re: [arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster To: Dan McGee Can't send to the list so instead I'm forwarding you my answer, apologies for the direct email. Leonidas -- Forwarded message -- From: "Leonidas Spyropoulos" Date: 11 Sep 2013 14:52 Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster To: "Public mailing list for Arch Linux development" < arch-dev-public@archlinux.org> Cc: > > On 11 Sep 2013 14:14, "Dan McGee" wrote: > > > > Hey guys, > > > > Since I don't know where to put this, please please PLEASE stop assigning > > me to bugs/feature requests/etc. related to the bugtracker. Just because I > > maintain the home page doesn't mean I maintain everything web related. I > > have 0% interest in maintaining Flyspray, migrating to a new platform, etc. > > > > It looks like we do need someone to do this; so if anyone knows someone > > that is willing to take a crack at getting us off the antiquated system we > > are using, > > Hello, > > Are we looking for upgrading Flyspray? Or moving to a new system like Bugzilla? I'm not a TU but I would be willing to spend some time working on an upgrade/migration, maybe with a help from a TU or a Dev. > > > I can at least help get some database dumps, etc. > > > > Thanks! > > -Dan > > Leonidas
Re: [arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Dan McGee wrote: > Hey guys, > > Since I don't know where to put this, please please PLEASE stop assigning > me to bugs/feature requests/etc. related to the bugtracker. Just because I > maintain the home page doesn't mean I maintain everything web related. I > have 0% interest in maintaining Flyspray, migrating to a new platform, etc. I found 4 bugs (15865, 20074, 24999, 36103) opened around bugtracker/flyspray. Nothing really important in a day to day work. The most controversial is FS#24999 as flyspray seems still under development[1] and do job pretty well as far I know. Jira is free for opensource[2], so we can use it at no software cost (or even hosting cost). But it's closed source and a running in java. I receive a lot of complain from engineers in charge of setuping our company jira. > It looks like we do need someone to do this; so if anyone knows someone > that is willing to take a crack at getting us off the antiquated system we > are using, I can at least help get some database dumps, etc. As I previously stated, if sysadmin team needs help, I'd be pleased. But the answer was we are already staffed. By example, it would be interesting to add a kind of ARM[3] in our official infrastructure. Cheers, [1] https://github.com/Flyspray/flyspray/ [2] https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request [3] https://seblu.net/a/arm/ -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A
Re: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
On 2013-09-11 16:15, Dan McGee wrote: > Forwarded. Thanks for the offer, we'll see what people think. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Nowaker > Date: Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:51 AM > Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster > To: dpmc...@gmail.com > > > It looks like we do need someone to do this; so if anyone knows someone >> that is willing to take a crack at getting us off the antiquated system we >> are using, I can at least help get some database dumps, etc. >> > > Do you guys feel like using Atlassian JIRA for bugtracking? Since I run a > JIRA hosting company, I may host and admin a JIRA for you. If you like the > idea, I would ask Atlassian for a free open source license for Arch Linux > and perform a migration so no bugreports are lost. > > Just let me know if you are interested. > > (Replied directly to you Dan, because I'm not allowed to arch-dev-public. > You may forward my reply to arch-dev-public to trigger the discussion. > Thanks). > In my opinion JIRA is a bit too much for our needs. Flyspray and Bugzilla are simpler, but maybe it's just the power of habit. -- Bartłomiej Piotrowski http://bpiotrowski.pl/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: Re: I do not wish to be a bug tracker webmaster
On 11.09.2013 16:16, Dan McGee wrote: > Forwarding. Can someone approve Leonidas to post to this list? Not really sure why, I thought only devs/TUs/jr devs get access and he isn't any of those afaict. > Are we looking for upgrading Flyspray? Or moving to a new system like > Bugzilla? I'm not a TU but I would be willing to spend some time working on > an upgrade/migration, maybe with a help from a TU or a Dev. Upgrading flyspray? Their git repo seems pretty dead to me... About bugzilla: I've already adapted that flyspray_to_bugzilla.pl script a bit and posted my version on FS#24999, it's kind of working. I'd be willing to help migrating and setting stuff up, but I don't know if I want to maintain it later since I've never used it before from an admin perspective. I don't want to push change and leave people hanging later. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping LXDM
2013/9/11 Gaetan Bisson > > [2013-09-11 08:56:42 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > > On 2013-09-11 00:53, Allan McRae wrote: > > > Also "thanks to its developers and recent changes in package" and > > > "during 2 years since last release" make zero sense taken together. > > > > What exactly doesn't make sense? The fact that LXDM is based on > > ConsoleKit and even with git patch is unable to utilize logind correctly? > > Upstream seems pretty active; do you mean that all the problems we have > with our package are still present in git master? If not, we should try > to convince upstream to make a release - and if they are not willing to > we can always package a git snapshot. Now I adopted LXDM, and willing to maintain it in the future. lxdm 0.4.1-26 is the current git snapshot, and it works pretty well. The commits in the recent days are fix the compatibility with systemd-logind's session tracking feature, and fix autologin functionality (thanks to dgod). If you found any problem with the current package, please report it in our bug tracker. But if there are still major problems come to light, then I won't hesitate to move it into unsupported. -- György Balló
