Unresponsive maintainer of plasma-widget-menubar
Hi, the package maintainer of plasma-widget-menubar doesn't response for some months. The package needs to be updated to v0.2.0. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952360. I like to take the maintainership. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Unresponsive maintainer of plasma-widget-menubar
Am Sonntag, 25. August 2013, 14:39:50 schrieben Sie: > Hi, > > the package maintainer of plasma-widget-menubar doesn't response for some > months. The package needs to be updated to v0.2.0. See > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952360. > > I like to take the maintainership. > Problem has been solved, the maintainer jreznik has added me as a co- maintainer. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Review swap
Am Mittwoch, 19. Dezember 2012, 14:30:53 schrieb Neil Horman: > Hey all- > I've got this package I'm trying to get reviewed: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884291 > > Will to swap for it if anyone is interested. > > Neil I'll do the review. Please have a look at my open review requests: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&component=Package%20Review&email1=mario.blaettermann%40gmail.com&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&query_format=advanced&version=rawhide&order=bug_id&list_id=962349 Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
Hi Ron, Am 01.06.2011 11:19, schrieb Ron Yorston: > Hans de Goede wrote: >> I plan to use 1 subpackage per extension of the frippery >> extension collection, so that people can install only those >> which they want without automatically getting all of >> them. > > I'd prefer them to be in one package: they are intended to work > together. > > I understand that management of extensions has been added to gnome- > tweak-tool. That seems like a better approach to controlling > extensions than using the package manager. > > Ron As far as gnome-tweak-tool can activate/deactivate certain extensions, I would prefer to have a package. This would be convenient for systems with many users. A global package provides extensions, which are displayed in gnome-tweak-tool, and users can switch them on and off. No need to search for extensions and install them individually. Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
FluxStyle package owned
Hi, FYI, I've just taken the maintainership of the long-time orphaned package fluxstyle [1]. A scratch build for F15 in Koji was succesful recently [2]. [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/fluxstyle [2] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3063647 Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Quite a few reviews needed :)
Am 27.06.2011 20:03, schrieb Ankur Sinha: > Hello, > > I've recently been packaging applications for the fedora medical > initiative. There are quite a few of them. If you have some time to > spare, please review a few (or just one). Even if you're not a sponsored > packager, I encourage you to please review them unofficially. It will > improve your understanding of the guidelines, and also pick out quite a > few errors and help me :) > > Of course, if you accept a ticket, I will review a package for you in > return :) > > Please have a look at the following url: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673841 > I've picked up toothchart for the time being, some more reviews will follow probably. My open reviews: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Fedora&version=rawhide&component=Package+Review&query_format=advanced&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=MODIFIED&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=mariobl%40freenet.de Cheers, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Review swap: OSGi-bundle-ant-task - A wrapper around Bnd to allow easy bundle creation from ant builds
Am 17.07.2011 16:19, schrieb Ankur Sinha: > Hello, > > Another *tiny* package review I'd like to swap. This one consists of a > single jar file :) > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719402 > I'll pick up this one. Here's a list of my open reviews where you may choose from: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Fedora&version=rawhide&component=Package+Review&query_format=advanced&bug_status=NEW&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=mariobl%40freenet.de Some pre-review work has been done on some packages. Feel free to pick what you like. Cheers, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Review swaps: WindowMaker dockapps
Hello, Fedora ships WindowMaker and some *.box windowmanagers which are able to use WindowMaker applets. But it lacks of them, that's why I've build some packages. Here is a list: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Fedora&version=rawhide&component=Package+Review&query_format=advanced&bug_status=NEW&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=mariobl%40freenet.de On some of them some pre-review work has already been done. Shouldn't be that hard to review them. Please let me know what I can do in return. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Review Request: qodem - Qodem terminal emulator and communications package
Hi Richard, Am 25.07.2011 17:11, schrieb Richard Shaw: > Anyone have a sec to review this[1]? It should be VERY simple. > > I recently did a little bit of retro-BBS'ing and couldn't find > anything that would handle the ANSI art properly when I found qodem, > which is a pseudo-clone of the old DOS Qmodem. > > I'll do a review swap if needed! > > Thanks, > Richard > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725267 I've assigned it to me. Please would you have a look at my open reviews: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&component=Package%20Review&email1=mariobl%40freenet.de&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&keywords=&keywords_type=allwords&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&query_format=advanced&version=rawhide&order=bug_id&query_based_on= Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Compiler as Require
Am 26.08.2011 21:41, schrieb Peter Lemenkov: > 2011/8/26 Sergio Belkin: >> Hi >> Is it OK include a compiler (eg gcc-c++) for a "-devel" subpackage? > > This sounds very weird. My opinion - no. > The packaging guide prevents us from using a compiler as a BR, because it is part of the basic build environment anyway. But using a compiler as a runtime requirement should be OK. As far as I know, compilers are not usually in the (automatically generated) runtime dependency list of a -devel subpackage. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpm changelog (was Re: Notice of intent: patching glibc)
Am 07.09.2011 20:00, schrieb Michael Cronenworth: > Genes MailLists on 09/07/2011 12:57 PM wrote: >> Seems pretty useful for users to see what changed - curious why not? > > Users are not programmers. Commits may range from "merge from branch > such-n-such" to "ran indent to clean up formatting" which has extremely > little value to users. +1 from me. Well, it would be convenient to automate the rpm changelog creation in some way. But we need *our* changelog for *our* changes to the package. Most packages ship a NEWS file anyway, which includes the changes to the software itself. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 15 / Gnome 3 gotchas
Am 07.05.2011 16:51, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:58:51PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 11:05 +0100, Camilo Mesias wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I made some noises on IRC about people upgrading to F15 (like myself) >>> who would all come across the same surprises and would have to find a >>> way to work around them. I suggested it might help to publish >>> something like release notes but more user oriented, to help to ease >>> the pain (and to defuse the many questions that will undoubtedly find >>> their way to the various support forums). At the time no-one seemed to >>> pick up on the idea. >>> >>> I wrote a blog post about it, maybe not the best way to help Fedora >>> users so feel free to take the idea and the content and repackage it >>> as appropriate. >>> >>> http://littlethorpe.net/wordpress/?p=334 "Fedora 15 Gnome 3 gotchas" >>> >>> If nothing else maybe I have included the right words so that users >>> can Google for 'what the heck happened to my minimise button' or >>> whatever and find some help. >> >> Gnome 3 is a usability disaster. It added some useful things, yes, >> but it also REMOVED some useful things - what a hell!? >> Since when is that a valid development practice? >> Do we hate our users or what? > > # yum install @XFCE > > Then, log out and at the log in window select "XFCE 4" as the session. > > Rich. > That's no solution. We don't want to switch to Xfce, we want to have back a usable GNOME. I appreciated GNOME for its modularity all the years. If there's a painless way to get this back and to get my favorite window manager Fluxbox back into GNOME 3, there's no need to switch the desktop. In fact, it was always a task for distributors to make a DE really usable. Remember the introduction of the Nautilus spatial view in GNOME 2.14. Due to massive user protests, we had our old behavior (as default) back after some time. The same should happen with the "fallback mode" in GNOME 3. We need a new GNOME as close as possible to the old one, to keep the current users. Well, it would be fine to get new GNOME lovers, but not by kicking the old farts out. Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Package review SIG dead?
Am 06.10.2011 22:17, schrieb Richard Shaw: > After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity > unless I'm missing something. > > I am still interested. Anyone else? > > Thanks, > Richard Yes, of course. I think we need some infrastructure besides the wiki. And a policy for handling old review requests, to shrink the continuously growing "new package review tickets" list a bit. There are a lot of tickets where the packager is no longer responsible. The list becomes confused more and more, and it's not attractive for potential reviewers, unless someone is interested in to see a certain software in Fedora. Besides that, there are quite old package reviews with the FE_NEEDSPONSOR blocker set, and they seem to be one-time-wonders in many cases. I'm in doubt if they will find a sponsor one day. Examples for such outdated tickets are bugs # 605290, 616935, 636930 and many more. In fact, all review tickets which are still incomplete and idle for more than half a year are outdated and should be closed (after a last attempt to ping the packager). Best Regards, Mario -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
