help needed with 2 haskell package reviews

[Jens-Ulrik Petersen]

Hi, I would really like these two packages added to F38:

NEW ghc-constraints: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2162872
NEW ghc-base64: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2163472

both are needed by newer pandoc and a number of other packages.

Can anyone please help review them?

Thanks, Jens
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Orphaning rubygem-jquery-rails + *js-jquery*

[Orion Poplawski]

On 2/2/23 10:16, Vít Ondruch wrote:

Hi,

I have spend some quality time bringing rubygem-railties test suite 
up2date and this resulted in dropping the dependency on 
rubygem-jquery-rails. Nothing else in Fedora depends on that package and 
therefore I orphaned it and I suggest to let it go.


Since I don't maintain rubygem-jquery-rails, I have also released 
ownership of js-jquery package. I have saved the package a while ago 
from being retired, but I was never good maintainer. Because it is used 
by other packages, I hope it will find new maintainers quickly. The 
package was updated while ago by Stephen and recently by Orion, 
therefore adding them on CC.


I've taken it.  Co-maintainers welcome.

--
Orion Poplawski
he/him/his  - surely the least important thing about me
IT Systems Manager 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane   or...@nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Please join in planning Fedora's next 5-year strategic plan

[Matthew Miller]

I hope everyone here follows the Fedora Community blog one way or another,
but I know there are lot of things to follow, so posting this here too.

From https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/help-shape-the-fedora-strategy/

The Fedora.Next strategy was a key part of the success we’ve enjoyed
over the last few years. But we can’t stop there. It’s time to develop a
strategy to meet our goal for the next five years: doubling the number
of active contributors. To do this, there are a number of technical and
community objectives we need to drive. It looks like that number is 18.
The Fedora Council developed a list of 18 objectives to support the
impacts we’re looking for. Now it’s your turn. Let us know what you
think in the Discussion thread:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/43618

This is just the first step. We’re looking for discussion at a high
level. Over the next few months, we’ll have a thread dedicated to each
objective. Once we’ve had a chance to discuss it together, the Council
will vote on the final strategy. From there, we’ll start working on the
details to make these objectives a reality. I’m super excited to work on
this with you.




Again, that's: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/43618. Hope to see you
there.

If you're new to Fedora Discussion, you may want to start with

* Navigating Fedora Discussion — Tags, Categories, and Concepts:
  
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/navigating-fedora-discussion-tags-categories-and-concepts/3

* Tips and tricks: what do you need to know about Discourse platform
  
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/tips-and-tricks-what-do-you-need-to-know-about-discourse-platform/24773

* Guide to interacting with this site by email 
  
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/guide-to-interacting-with-this-site-by-email/25960



-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

SIG status, visibility, etc. [Re: Risc-V SIG?

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 09:51:37AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Yep. Sigs exist because they say they do. ;) 
> 
> The risc-v sig has been around for a while, but I guess a sig wiki page
> was never made. :( 

I like that we have low barriers to entry for SIGs, but we end up with a lot
of empty storefronts — or enthusiastic groups of people who aren't quite
sure what to do next after creating a wiki page. We actually talked about
this very issue at the Fedora Council hackfest last week, and it's one of
the things we want to take on as part of Strategy 2028.

And, this is the third time today that this has come up for me, from totally
different directions. Marie is working on a redesign for the high-level org
chart, and that lists a few kind of arbitrary SIGs and not others — see
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-org-chart-update-re-design-looking-for-feedback/46425/1
And Peter Boy for the docs team was asking about whatcanidoforfedora.org,
which has kind of the same problem: what groups are teams are active, what
is the current information, etc.

We had hoped to solve this with the sadly doomed Fedora Hubs project
(https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-hubs/), and then with Taiga
(https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/retiring-taiga-instance-on-teams-fedoraproject-org/)
and then simply by trying to maintain lists:

* https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/engineering/
* https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/mindshare/

.. which clearly also isn't working.


If anyone is interested in tackling this, I'd love to hear your thoughts
(either now, or save them up for when we get to planning the details of that
part of the strategy).


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Inactive packager check for F38

[Paul Wouters]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2023, Ben Cotton wrote:


For the curious, here are the stats from today's run:

### Found 2129 users in the packager group. ###
### Found 914 users with no activity in pagure/src.fp.org over the
last year. ###
### Found 845 users which also show no activity in Bodhi over the last year. ###


How many packages depend _only_ on people from this list? Eg are likely
to be unmaintained ?

Paul
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl - solved

[Miro Hrončok]

On 15. 02. 23 22:48, Kenneth Goldman wrote:

However, the %Description item has some 'smart quotes', which
cut and paste as utf-something.  fedpkg doesn't like those
characters.


What does "fedpkg doesn't like those characters" actually mean? I don't believe 
fedpkg validates the %description and UTF-8 should be totally OK in 
%description RPM-wise.


 1. What did you do?
 2. What did you expect to happen?
 3. What happened instead?

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora CoreOS Meeting Minutes 2023-02-15

[Dusty Mabe]

Minutes: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-02-15/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-02-15-16.29.html
Minutes (text): 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-02-15/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-02-15-16.29.txt
Log: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-02-15/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-02-15-16.29.log.html


#fedora-meeting-1: fedora_coreos_meeting



Meeting started by dustymabe at 16:29:29 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-02-15/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-02-15-16.29.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* roll call  (dustymabe, 16:29:31)

* Action items from last meeting  (dustymabe, 16:34:27)
  * dustymabe took the feedback from last meeting to the websites team:

https://gitlab.com/fedora/websites-apps/fedora-websites/fedora-websites-3.0/-/issues/89#note_1271079731
(dustymabe, 16:35:12)

* New Package Request: audit  (dustymabe, 16:35:57)
  * LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1362
(dustymabe, 16:36:04)
  * LINK:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/security_guide/sec-starting_the_audit_service
(travier, 16:48:41)
  * LINK: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2664811   (travier,
16:49:11)
  * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768815 maybe
(travier, 16:58:09)

* Ship the shimx64 binary in the CoreOS ISO image kind/enhancement
  (dustymabe, 17:00:30)
  * LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1413
(dustymabe, 17:00:36)

* open floor   (dustymabe, 17:29:48)
  * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104619
(dustymabe, 17:33:53)
  * LINK:
https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3243/
(jlebon, 17:36:57)
  * LINK:

https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/3243/#issuecomment-1180668694
(travier, 17:38:44)

Meeting ended at 17:39:54 UTC.




Action Items






Action Items, by person
---
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* dustymabe (97)
* bgilbert (57)
* travier (45)
* jlebon (37)
* zodbot (17)
* jmarrero (10)
* spresti[m] (2)
* aaradhak (1)
* copperi[m] (1)
* mnguyen (1)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.4

.. _`MeetBot`: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

RE: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl - solved

[Kenneth Goldman]

If a maintainer of the packaging tutorial at

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Packaging_Tutorial_GNU_Hello/

is listening ...  There is a sample spec file.  An obvious step for a newbie 
after
running rpmdev-newspec is to cut and paste from the web page sample to
.spec file.

However, the %Description item has some 'smart quotes', which
cut and paste as utf-something.  fedpkg doesn't like those
characters.

I suggest removing the quotes from the description.



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

F37 retrospective survey open through 9 March

[Ben Cotton]

In case you missed it on the Community Blog[1], the F37 retrospective
survey[2] is open through 9 March. As a reminder, this survey is about
the _process_ of creating F37, not the end result. This is the third
such survey, so we'll be able to start putting together trends.

This survey uses Fedora's LimeSurvey instance. Responses are anonymous.

[1] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/f37-retrospective-survey-open/
[2] https://fedoraproject.limequery.com/37

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Inactive packager check for F38

[Ben Cotton]

In accordance with FESCo's Inactive Packager Policy[1], packagers that
have been identified as inactive have a ticket in the
find-inactive-packagers repo[2]. One week after the final release,
packagers who remain inactive will be removed from the packager group.
(Note that pagure.io is one of the systems checked for activity, so
commenting on your ticket that you're still around will prevent you
from showing up in the second round.)

If you have suggestions for improvement, look for the open feature
issues[3] and file an issue in the find-inactive-packagers repo[4] if
it's not there already.

For the curious, here are the stats from today's run:

### Found 2129 users in the packager group. ###
### Found 914 users with no activity in pagure/src.fp.org over the
last year. ###
### Found 845 users which also show no activity in Bodhi over the last year. ###
### Found 812 users which show also no activity in mailing lists over
the last year. ###
### Found 812 users which also show no activity in Bugzilla over the
last year. ###

As we approach

[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_inactive_packagers/
[2] 
https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/issues?tags=inactive_packager&status=Open
[3] https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/issues?tags=feature
[4] https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/new_issue


-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

F39 proposal: Modernize Thread Building Blocks for Fedora 39 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Ben Cotton]

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39ModernizeTBB

This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.

== Summary ==
Fedora is currently shipping version 2020.3 (released July 10, 2020)
of the Thread Building Blocks library. The current upstream version is
2021.8 (released December 22, 2022). The Fedora community has
expressed [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372
interest] in moving the TBB package to track a more modern version of
the upstream.

== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:trodgers| Thomas Rodgers]]
* Email: trodg...@redhat.com


== Detailed Description ==
Fedora has shipped with version 2020.3 of the Thread Building Blocks
library since Fedora 33. The
upstream project made a decision to break backward compatibility after
that version was released.
As packages move to match the upstream's changes it becomes more
difficult to defer updating the
Fedora packaging for TBB. The situation is further complicated as
there are currently a majority
of TBB dependent packages which have not been updated to track a new
upstream release, as detailed in this
[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372#c1 analysis] on
the tracking issue.

This proposal aims to provide a way to modernize the TBB packge
version for Fedora while providing stability for those packages which
continue to depend on the older TBB library version.

It will be possible to install both devel and runtime versions of both
TBB packages, however the devel compat package for version 2020.3 will
require clients to point to a new include path where the legacy
headers will be found.

== Feedback ==


== Benefit to Fedora ==

Fedora 39 will include a current version of Thread Building Blocks
(version 2021.8) while continuing to support clients dependent on an
older version of TBB (version 2020.3). Fedora will stay relevant as
far as Thread Building Blocks clients are concerned.

== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** A compat package based on the current 2020.3 version of the
existing TBB package will be created.
** Evaluate TBB dependent packages to identify those which need to
move to the compat version of the TBB package. An initial analysis
suggests the majority of current TBB clients will need to move to the
compat package.
** Post a request for rebuilds to fedora-devel
** Create patches for those packages affected by this change to adjust
their includes to point the compat package's headers as necessary,
work with affected package owners to update package specs to account
for the change.
** When most packages are done, re-tag all the packages in rawhide.
** Watch fedora-devel and assist in rebuilding broken TBB clients.

* Other developers:
** Those who depend on Thread Building Blocks will have to rebuild
their packages. Feature owners will alleviate some of this work as
indicated above, and will assist those whose packages fail to build in
debugging them.

* Release engineering: TODO 

* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
** Apart from scope, this is business as usual, so no new policies, no
new guidelines.

== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
* No manual configuration or data migration needed.
* Some impact on other packages needing code changes to rebuild.

== How To Test ==
* No special hardware is needed.
* Parallel install of the 2020.3 TBB compat packages and the updated
TBB packages and checking that it does not break other packages.

== User Experience ==
* Expected to remain largely the same.
* Developers building third-party software on Fedora may need to
rebuild against the new TBB packages, and may need to adjust their
code to either remain on the compat TBB version or move to the new
version supplied by the updated TBB package.

== Dependencies ==
Packages that must be rebuilt:
& dnf repoquery -s --releasever=rawhide --whatrequires libtbb\*
--enablerepo=fedora | sort -u

The tracking [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372
issue's] analysis suggests that only the following packages will be
able to move to a newer TBB -
* fawkes
* gazebo
* opencascade
* pmemkv
* root

While the remaining clients of TBB will need to have their spec's
include paths adjusted to use the 2020.3 compat package.

== Contingency Plan ==

* Contingency mechanism: Worst case scenario is to abandon the update
and simply ship F39 with the existing TBB package, which is already in
rawhide.

== Documentation ==
* Notes on the scope of change, motivation, and likely impacts are in
the comments on the tracking
[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372 issue].
* https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/releases/tag/v2021.7.0
(Released 2nd October 2022)
* https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/releases/tag/v2020.3 (Released
10th July 2020)

== Release Notes ==



-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Re

RE: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl

[Artur Frenszek-Iwicki]

> Should that tutorial work?  Is it perhaps obsolete?
I'd say the opposite of obsolete - it's been updated to suggest using
fedpkg all along the way, instead of the old rpmbuild tools. But it
looks like it wasn't tested enough to make sure everything works.

> My newbie understanding is that fedpkg should get the source from the
> Source0 location and then follow the build instructions.
> Is that even close?
This is a bit complicated. When the package is being built, the list
of files is taken from the Source: tags in the spec file. However,
fedpkg keeps a separate file, "sources" (no extension), where it
lists files uploaded to the Fedora build cache. The justification
is that keeping source tarballs in the repository is a bad idea,
since these files can be really large (1GiB+ for game packages),
so they're stored in a cache instead, and the repository contains
only this "sources" file with references to said cache. (That being
said, you totally can store source files in the repo - this is
often done with stuff like non-standard Fedora configs.)

As for the "get the source from the Source0 location" bit - no.
fedpkg will not download stuff from Source: tags for you,
only the files listed in the "sources" file.

Since my impression is that you want to start experimenting with
RPM packaging in general, and not specifically fedpkg - I'll do
a bit shameless self-promotion and link to an article
on RPM packaging that I wrote some time ago:
https://blog.svgames.pl/article/basics-of-rpm-packaging

In this article, I show how to build RPM packages using the traditional
rpmbuild workflow. If you're just starting out with writing specs
and such, it should get you started enough to make switching
to fedpkg later down the road a no-brainer.

A.FI.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

RE: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl

[Kenneth Goldman]

> -Original Message-
> From: Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 6:03 PM
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url 
> or
> pushurl
>
> > Is there another argument to fedpkg?
> fedpkg has a --name argument, you can try using that.

I tried:

> fedpkg --release f37 --name hello mockbuild
sources file doesn't exist. Source files download skipped.
Could not execute mockbuild: Could not query n-v-r of hello: 'utf-8' codec 
can't decode byte 0x93 in position 194: invalid start byte

The spec file has this contents, right from the tutorial, and the tarball does 
exist there.

Version:2.10
Source0:https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-%{version}.tar.gz

>
> Alternatively, if you're just taking your first steps with packaging, you 
> can try:
> $ rpmbuild -bs path/to/your.spec
> $ mock path/to/file-created-by-previous-command.srpm
>
> This will first build an SRPM ("source rpm"), and then build it in mock, 
> which is
> pretty much exactly what "fedpkg mockbuild" does.

My .spec file is the one from the tutorial at

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Packaging_Tutorial_GNU_Hello/

Should that tutorial work?  Is it perhaps obsolete?

My newbie understanding is that fedpkg should get the source from the Source0 
location and then follow the build instructions.  Is that even close?




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Orphaning python3-pyPEG2

[Tomáš Orsava]

Hi,
I have orphaned python3-pyPEG2. It used to be required by qutebrowser 
(keyboard-focused browser with a minimal GUI), but it is not needed 
anymore. I haven't found any other package that needs it.


Tomáš
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora 38 compose report: 20230215.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-38-20230214.n.1
NEW: Fedora-38-20230215.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:7
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   85
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  3.16 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   846.66 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   31.74 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: Kinoite/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-aarch64-38-20230215.n.0.iso
Image: Cloud_Base raw-xz s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-38-20230215.n.0.s390x.raw.xz
Image: Server_KVM qcow2 ppc64le
Path: Server/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Server-KVM-38-20230215.n.0.ppc64le.qcow2
Image: Comp_Neuro live x86_64
Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Comp_Neuro-Live-x86_64-38-20230215.n.0.iso
Image: Xfce raw-xz aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/images/Fedora-Xfce-38-20230215.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz
Image: Cloud_Base qcow2 s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-38-20230215.n.0.s390x.qcow2
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: 
Silverblue/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-ppc64le-38-20230215.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: KDE raw-xz aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/images/Fedora-KDE-38-20230214.n.1.aarch64.raw.xz

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: libcupsfilters-2.0b3-1.fc38
Summary: Library for developing printing filters
RPMs:libcupsfilters libcupsfilters-devel
Size:3.04 MiB

Package: scd2html-1.0.0-1.fc38
Summary: Generates HTML for scdoc source files
RPMs:scd2html
Size:119.30 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  R-httpuv-1.6.9-1.fc38
Old package:  R-httpuv-1.6.6-2.fc38
Summary:  HTTP and WebSocket Server Library
RPMs: R-httpuv
Size: 2.09 MiB
Size change:  7.31 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Feb 14 2023 Tom Callaway  - 1.6.9-1
  - update to 1.6.9


Package:  R-tikzDevice-0.12.4-1.fc38
Old package:  R-tikzDevice-0.12.3.1-10.fc38
Summary:  R Graphics Output in LaTeX Format
RPMs: R-tikzDevice
Size: 2.54 MiB
Size change:  7.31 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Feb 14 2023 Tom Callaway  - 0.12.4-1
  - update to 0.12.4


Package:  apptainer-1.1.6-1.fc38
Old package:  apptainer-1.1.5-3.fc38
Summary:  Application and environment virtualization formerly known as 
Singularity
RPMs: apptainer apptainer-suid
Size: 107.61 MiB
Size change:  29.49 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Feb 14 2023 Dave Dykstra  - 1.1.6-1
  - Update to upstream 1.1.6.


Package:  bluedevil-5.27.0-1.fc38
Old package:  bluedevil-5.26.90-1.fc38
Summary:  Bluetooth stack for KDE
RPMs: bluedevil
Size: 2.83 MiB
Size change:  -1.59 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Feb 09 2023 Marc Deop  - 5.27.0-1
  - 5.27.0


Package:  breeze-gtk-5.27.0-1.fc38
Old package:  breeze-gtk-5.26.90-1.fc38
Summary:  Breeze widget theme for GTK
RPMs: breeze-gtk breeze-gtk-common breeze-gtk-gtk2 breeze-gtk-gtk3 
breeze-gtk-gtk4
Size: 406.42 KiB
Size change:  -1016 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Feb 09 2023 Marc Deop  - 5.27.0-1
  - 5.27.0


Package:  brewtarget-3.0.6-2.fc38
Old package:  brewtarget-3.0.5-2.fc38
Summary:  An open source beer recipe creation tool 
RPMs: brewtarget
Size: 23.65 MiB
Size change:  131.91 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Feb 13 2023 Sandro  - 3.0.6-1
  - Update to 3.0.6 (RHBZ#2167997)
  - Add missing changelog
  - Use 2.fc38


Package:  checkpolicy-3.5-0.rc3.1.fc38
Old package:  checkpolicy-3.5-0.rc2.1.fc38.1
Summary:  SELinux policy compiler
RPMs: checkpolicy
Size: 1.39 MiB
Size change:  7.19 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Feb 14 2023 Petr Lautrbach  - 3.5-0.rc3.1
  - SELinux userspace 3.5-rc3 release


Package:  converseen-0.9.11.0-1.fc38
Old package:  converseen-0.9.10.1-1.fc38
Summary:  A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt5 and Magick++
RPMs: converseen
Size: 1.88 MiB
Size change:  2.38 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Feb 15 2023 Filipe Rosset  - 0.9.11.0-1
  - Update to 0.9.11.0 fixes rhbz#2169785


Package:  crosswords-puzzle-sets-xword-dl-0.4.3-1.fc38
Old package:  crosswords-puzzle-sets-xword-dl-0.4.1-1.fc38
Summary:  Puzzle Sets from assorted newspapers for GNOME Crosswords
RPMs: crosswords-puzzle-sets-xword-dl
Size: 32.16 KiB
Size change:  94 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Feb 15 2023 Davide Cavalca  - 0.4.3-1
  - Update to 0.4.3; Fixes: RHBZ#2169264


Package:  flatpak-kcm-5.27.0-2.fc38
Old package:  flatpak-kcm-5.26.90-1.fc38
Summary:  Flatpak Permissions Management KCM
RPMs: flatpak-kcm
Size: 500.26 KiB
Size change:  13.88 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Feb 09 2023 Marc Deop  - 5.27.0-1
  - 5.27.0

  * Tue Feb 14 2023 Marc Deop  - 5.27.0-2
  - Rebuild against new sources


Package:  git-2.39.2-1.fc38
Old package:  git-2.39.1-1.fc38.1
Summary:  Fast Version Control System
RPMs: git git-all git

Re: fedpkg: Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 14. 02. 23 v 20:19 Kenneth Goldman napsal(a):

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Packaging_Tutorial_
GNU_Hello/



I wish this was update to suggest to create git repository right from start.

BTW I think that fedpkg could help with this task and therefore opened 
this RFE:


https://pagure.io/fedpkg/issue/500


Vít




Working through the basic tutorial there:

fedpkg --release f37 mockbuild

fails with

Failed to get repository name from Git url or pushurl
Failed to get ns from Git url or pushurl
[repeats forever]

How does fedpkg know what to build?  Does it default to whatever .spec file
exists?
Is there another argument to fedpkg. Are there some other steps between
Rpmdev-newspec and fedpkg?

What am I missing?


--
Work 1-914-945-2415


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: fkinit -u instructions

[Clemens Lang]

Hi,

Kenneth Goldman  wrote:


-Original Message-
From: Clemens Lang 
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 12:59 PM
To: Development discussions related to Fedora

You are right, but fkinit will tell you, so I don’t think we need to  
clarify this in

the documentation:


:) cllang@frootmig:~$ fkinit -u clang
Enter your password and OTP concatenated. (Ignore that the prompt is for
only the token)
Enter OTP Token Value:
:) cllang@frootmig:~$


For a newbie (me), it's not clear what the OTP is.  Is it something from  
here?


https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/user/kgold/settings/otp/


Yes.


If correct, might a link be useful, along with some guidance on then to  
use it?


If you have two-factor authentication enabled on this page (or always?), it
will display the following message:


Additional configuration is required when using Kerberos tickets when OTP
is enabled Read the documentation for details on configuring your system


“documentation” is a link to
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-accounts/user/#pkinit.

As a user, you should thus never end up in a situation where you have
two-factor authentication enabled, but have not read this documentation.
(Additionally, we should probably update this documentation to also explain
that fkinit can be used.)


It is a bit unfortunate that fkinit always prints the "Enter your password
and OTP concatenated. (Ignore that the prompt is for only the token)” line
even for users that do not have OTP enabled, though. Compare:


$ fkinit -u clang
Enter your password and OTP concatenated. (Ignore that the prompt is for  
only the token)

Enter OTP Token Value:

with

$ fkinit -u jjelen  # shamelessly calling you out for not having 2FA  
enabled!
Enter your password and OTP concatenated. (Ignore that the prompt is for  
only the token)

Password for jje...@fedoraproject.org:
kinit: Password read interrupted while getting initial credentials


Since there seems to be some API that can be used without authentication to
determine whether a user has two-factor authentication enabled, maybe fkinit
should query that API, and only show that hint when used with an account
that actually uses it to avoid confusion?


--
Clemens Lang
RHEL Crypto Team
Red Hat


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: TSS maintainer volunteer

[Petr Pisar]

V Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 07:37:30PM +, Kenneth Goldman napsal(a):
> How do I get packager status?  How do I work with a packager - is that a 
> person or a program?
> 
> A quick google gave me this link: 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.fedoraproject.org_en-2DUS_package-2Dmaintainers_Joining-5Fthe-5FPackage-5FMaintainers_&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=DZCVG43VcL8GTneMZb8k8lEwb-O1GZktFfre1-mlmiA&m=s70Bz9k22m9018JPgVNOAnmz7DqkzTJI_QXmAfcI-pzZbLnQwyYpgp0rgTxhQ1Hg&s=3fAYyQr_EQBDWPP3121TuoPS_dDADrPuxuTVcuf5W88&e=
> 
> I found that and followed all the steps.  However, it ends at Finding 
> software 
> you wish to maintain for Fedora".
> 
You wrote you were interested in tss2 package. Since the package was retired
from Fedora, it's a great piece of "software to maintain" for you.

> What's next?

There is a subchapter

of the Joining page. (A chapter topology is shown in the left column, JavaScript
required. I also find it hard to discover.)

You basically wants to unretire the package
.
That involves reviewing the package

and getting a sponsor who will guide you and who will adds you to the packager
group after finishing the package review.

Your path is a little bit atypical because the documentation is written from
a point of view of a new packager who wants to add a completely new package
.
You can follow it. The only difference for unretiring packages is a way of
creating a dist-git repository after passing the review and gettig sponsored. 

-- Petr


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue