Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release gnome-mplayer-1.0.5-3.mga2
Mm... another problem is that gmtk currently does not build with gtk3 yet. 2012/1/14 Funda Wang : > Well, we still have gecko-mediaplayer, which should be linked with > gtk2. And I don't know whether it is possible a gtk2 plugin of gecko > could involk a gtk3 app correctly. > > 2012/1/14 JA Magallon : >> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:03:10 +0100 (CET) >> fwang wrote: >> >>> Name : gnome-mplayer Relocations: (not relocatable) >>> Version : 1.0.5 Vendor: Mageia.Org >>> Release : 3.mga2 Build Date: Fri Jan 13 18:55:19 >>> 2012 >>> Install Date: (not installed) Build Host: ecosse >>> Group : Video Source RPM: (none) >>> Size : 1007661 License: GPLv2+ >>> Signature : (none) >>> Packager : fwang >>> URL : http://kdekorte.googlepages.com/gnomemplayer >>> Summary : Simple GUI for MPlayer >>> Description : >>> GNOME MPlayer is a simple GUI for MPlayer. It is intended to be a >>> nice tight player and provide a simple and clean interface to >>> MPlayer. GNOME MPlayer has a rich API that is exposed via DBus. >>> Using DBus you can control a single or multiple instances of GNOME >>> MPlayer from a single command. >>> >>> fwang 1.0.5-3.mga2: >>> + Revision: 195758 >>> - really disable gtk3 >>> - disable nautilus ext, so that we do not need gtk3 >> >> Why ? As its name says, it is a player for _GNOME_, and current Gnome >> in Mageia is based on GTK3. >> So, why ? >> (and I really don't know what does this imply..., but if it has to be run >> under KDE, let someone build kde-mplayer. this sounds like 'lets handicap >> it so it runs on every desktop'. Sorry if it is not the case...) >> >>
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release gnome-mplayer-1.0.5-3.mga2
Well, we still have gecko-mediaplayer, which should be linked with gtk2. And I don't know whether it is possible a gtk2 plugin of gecko could involk a gtk3 app correctly. 2012/1/14 JA Magallon : > On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:03:10 +0100 (CET) > fwang wrote: > >> Name : gnome-mplayer Relocations: (not relocatable) >> Version : 1.0.5 Vendor: Mageia.Org >> Release : 3.mga2 Build Date: Fri Jan 13 18:55:19 >> 2012 >> Install Date: (not installed) Build Host: ecosse >> Group : Video Source RPM: (none) >> Size : 1007661 License: GPLv2+ >> Signature : (none) >> Packager : fwang >> URL : http://kdekorte.googlepages.com/gnomemplayer >> Summary : Simple GUI for MPlayer >> Description : >> GNOME MPlayer is a simple GUI for MPlayer. It is intended to be a >> nice tight player and provide a simple and clean interface to >> MPlayer. GNOME MPlayer has a rich API that is exposed via DBus. >> Using DBus you can control a single or multiple instances of GNOME >> MPlayer from a single command. >> >> fwang 1.0.5-3.mga2: >> + Revision: 195758 >> - really disable gtk3 >> - disable nautilus ext, so that we do not need gtk3 > > Why ? As its name says, it is a player for _GNOME_, and current Gnome > in Mageia is based on GTK3. > So, why ? > (and I really don't know what does this imply..., but if it has to be run > under KDE, let someone build kde-mplayer. this sounds like 'lets handicap > it so it runs on every desktop'. Sorry if it is not the case...) > >
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > Op zaterdag 14 januari 2012 01:10:48 schreef Jeff Robins: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > > > "your logic is flawed" > > > > > > Yes it was. > > > > When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an > > extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic > > makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The > sentence > > below is what caused my initial confusion: > > > > "The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . " > > > > Sorry, > > > > Jeff > > thanks for letting me be Spock :-D > Welcome
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Op zaterdag 14 januari 2012 01:10:48 schreef Jeff Robins: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > > "your logic is flawed" > > > > Yes it was. > > When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an > extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic > makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence > below is what caused my initial confusion: > > "The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . " > > Sorry, > > Jeff thanks for letting me be Spock :-D
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > > > "your logic is flawed" > > Yes it was. When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence below is what caused my initial confusion: "The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . " Sorry, Jeff
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release gnome-mplayer-1.0.5-3.mga2
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:03:10 +0100 (CET) fwang wrote: > Name: gnome-mplayerRelocations: (not relocatable) > Version : 1.0.5 Vendor: Mageia.Org > Release : 3.mga2Build Date: Fri Jan 13 18:55:19 > 2012 > Install Date: (not installed) Build Host: ecosse > Group : Video Source RPM: (none) > Size: 1007661 License: GPLv2+ > Signature : (none) > Packager: fwang > URL : http://kdekorte.googlepages.com/gnomemplayer > Summary : Simple GUI for MPlayer > Description : > GNOME MPlayer is a simple GUI for MPlayer. It is intended to be a > nice tight player and provide a simple and clean interface to > MPlayer. GNOME MPlayer has a rich API that is exposed via DBus. > Using DBus you can control a single or multiple instances of GNOME > MPlayer from a single command. > > fwang 1.0.5-3.mga2: > + Revision: 195758 > - really disable gtk3 > - disable nautilus ext, so that we do not need gtk3 Why ? As its name says, it is a player for _GNOME_, and current Gnome in Mageia is based on GTK3. So, why ? (and I really don't know what does this imply..., but if it has to be run under KDE, let someone build kde-mplayer. this sounds like 'lets handicap it so it runs on every desktop'. Sorry if it is not the case...)
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 23:10:53 schreef Jeff Robins: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > > Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins: > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 > > > > wrote: > > > > Wait. > > > > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly > > > > security bugs, but doesn't add new features. > > > > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new > > > > bugs, and so would be more secure. > > > > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more > > > > security > > > > > > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting > > > > new features.) > > > > > > > > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla > > > > browsers the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, > > > > Seamonkey. > > > > > > > > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the > > > > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download > > > > the latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be > > > > available there at least a week sooner.) > > > > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is > > > > available. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > André > > > > > > I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the > > > > requirements > > > > > for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, > > > > but > > > > > not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay > > > secure is invalid. ( > > > > http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-sup > > po > > > > > rt-release ) > > > > > > Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox > > > hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the > > > > latest > > > > > can use the upstream and be automatically updated. > > > ( > > > > http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/) > > > > > My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is > > > 9months and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term > > > release, Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in > > > the middle of the second Mageia long-term release. This would create > > > more work and a long-term Mageia, which will have a major component > > > update during the long-term support period. > > > > > > --Jeff > > > > look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions > > cross > > over for 2 or 3 months > > > > so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule > > The 2-3 month overlap doesn't solve our problem. Assuming that we both > start on the same month of the same year, which we aren't, and call it > January 2012: > > Jan 2012 (good): > We do long-term 1 and Mozilla does ESR1. > > Sept 2012(good): > We do long-term 2 and Mozilla has just released FF ESR2. > > June 2013(bad): > We do long-term 3, but Mozilla won't release FF ESR3 until Sept 2013. FF > ESR2 is defunct as of Jan 2013. We only get 3 months of support on ESR2 for > long-term 3. > > March 2014(good): > We do long-term 4 and Mozilla released FF ESR3 in Sept. We get support > until Dec 2015, which is when we release long-term 5. > > --Jeff "your logic is flawed" we have version freeze and testing several months before release so, let's say mga2 ships with FF10. if mga2 is release june, mga3 would be march 2013, with FF17. mga4 would be released around dec 2013, with FF24 mga5 would be released with FF33, etc.. HOWEVER! mga1 continues support until at least release of mga3, and thus will also carry FF10. mga2 has the same thing, when FF10 becomes EOL, mga2 will have to "update" to FF17 as well... AND in advance of release of the new versions. but otoh, this is all speculation on the continuation of 9m release schedule, and if it's strictly adhered or not, and if FF isn't going to deviate or change... this is well enough in advance thinking imho, no need to think further than this. first we should also note if WE ourselves need to have LTS versions and IF we can support that... etc... in short, due to 3month overlap, the FF ERS cycle is 9m, just like mageia...
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 > wrote: > > > Wait. > > > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly > > > security bugs, but doesn't add new features. > > > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new > > > bugs, and so would be more secure. > > > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more > security > > > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new > > > features.) > > > > > > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers > > > the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey. > > > > > > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the > > > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the > > > latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available > > > there at least a week sooner.) > > > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available. > > > > > > -- > > > André > > > > I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the > requirements > > for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, > but > > not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay > > secure is invalid. ( > > > http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo > > rt-release ) > > > > Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox > > hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the > latest > > can use the upstream and be automatically updated. > > ( > http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/) > > > > My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months > > and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release, > > Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of > > the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a > > long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the > > long-term support period. > > > > --Jeff > > look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions > cross > over for 2 or 3 months > > so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule > The 2-3 month overlap doesn't solve our problem. Assuming that we both start on the same month of the same year, which we aren't, and call it January 2012: Jan 2012 (good): We do long-term 1 and Mozilla does ESR1. Sept 2012(good): We do long-term 2 and Mozilla has just released FF ESR2. June 2013(bad): We do long-term 3, but Mozilla won't release FF ESR3 until Sept 2013. FF ESR2 is defunct as of Jan 2013. We only get 3 months of support on ESR2 for long-term 3. March 2014(good): We do long-term 4 and Mozilla released FF ESR3 in Sept. We get support until Dec 2015, which is when we release long-term 5. --Jeff
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 22:34:39 schreef Sander Lepik: > 13.01.2012 23:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: > > look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions > > cross over for 2 or 3 months > > > > so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule > > 9m release schedule, but aren't we giving support for 18m? > > -- > Sander yes, but as maintainer told me: we do the same as we do now, just after 9months, instead of every month... just one big, instead of a lot of smaller ones plus, i think due to the merging time, we have more time to test the update properly. i'm all for it, and for all people wanting to have the latest, i will not use the new versions, i can guarantee that! not even for work and HTML5 related topics
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
13.01.2012 23:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions cross over for 2 or 3 months so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule 9m release schedule, but aren't we giving support for 18m? -- Sander
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 wrote: > > Wait. > > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly > > security bugs, but doesn't add new features. > > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new > > bugs, and so would be more secure. > > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security > > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new > > features.) > > > > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers > > the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey. > > > > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the > > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the > > latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available > > there at least a week sooner.) > > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available. > > > > -- > > André > > I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements > for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but > not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay > secure is invalid. ( > http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo > rt-release ) > > Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox > hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest > can use the upstream and be automatically updated. > (http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/) > > My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months > and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release, > Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of > the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a > long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the > long-term support period. > > --Jeff look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions cross over for 2 or 3 months so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 wrote: > Wait. > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly > security bugs, but doesn't add new features. > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new > bugs, and so would be more secure. > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new > features.) > > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers the > Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey. > > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the > latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available there > at least a week sooner.) > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available. > > -- > André > > I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay secure is invalid. ( http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-support-release ) Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest can use the upstream and be automatically updated. (http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/) My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release, Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the long-term support period. --Jeff
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mageia 2 Alpha 3 available for tests
2012/1/13 Pascal Terjan : > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 15:37, Manuel Hiebel wrote: >> Hello, any news about the nonfree iso ? > > It is still non free, which means it was not released. > It has to be tested further, but since tmb has quite enough on his plate with the LiveCDs right now, we should not forget it but wait another one or two weeks
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1
Am 13.01.2012 15:05, schrieb D.Morgan: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Thierry Vignaud > wrote: >> On 13 January 2012 02:30, dams wrote: >>> dams 1.4.9-1.mga1: >>> + Revision: 195501 >>> - Update BR to install libmjpegtools-devel instead of mjpegtools-devel >> why? > Because in mageia 1 mjpegtools doesn't have a provide %name-devel > So we then use an incorrect non-arch-independent require? What about pkgconfig(mjpegtools) ?
Re: [Mageia-dev] [RFC] Moving various packages/codecs to tainted
Op donderdag 12 januari 2012 02:32:41 schreef Anssi Hannula: > On 11.01.2012 16:01, Pascal Terjan wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:56, Anssi Hannula wrote: > >> On 10.01.2012 15:07, Pascal Terjan wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 03:20, Anssi Hannula wrote: > The problem is that that "balance" was achieved by sticking packages > in PLF/main/contrib semi-randomly. For example, H.264 decoders and > MPEG-4 video encoders are in main/core, while e.g. AAC audio decoders > are in PLF/tainted. If one'd put them into an order, IMO H.264 and > MPEG-4 would be much more prominent and tainted candidates instead of > AAC decoding... Also, in e.g. MPEG-4 case we have encoders both in > core and in tainted, e.g. we have ffmpeg in core, but xvid in > tainted. > >>> > >>> I agree we need rules, but "being covered with patents" does not make > >>> sense, as the patent owner may agree with using it in free software. > >>> I think something like "No actively enforced patent" in core would be > >>> good. > >> > >> Possibly, but how do you define that, exactly? > >> > >> Does a licensing program count as "enforcing" or do you mean something > >> else? > > > > Yes, that's what I meant > > So it doesn't change anything regarding my original post, since all the > codecs I talked about have licensing programs. A) either we move all those with licensing programs into tainted, and make isos contain tainted (since all mirrors ship tainted as well...). B) we put only actively enforced patents into tainted and don't have tainted on iso...
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1
Le 13/01/2012 09:37, Thierry Vignaud a écrit : On 13 January 2012 02:30, dams wrote: dams 1.4.9-1.mga1: + Revision: 195501 - Update BR to install libmjpegtools-devel instead of mjpegtools-devel why? Because of: http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/uploads/failure/1/core/updates_testing/20120113010908.dams.valstar.28362/log/botcmd.1326417002.jonund.log -- Damien Lallement Treasurer of Mageia.Org twitter: damsweb - IRC: damsweb/coincoin
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mageia 2 Alpha 3 available for tests
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 15:37, Manuel Hiebel wrote: > Hello, any news about the nonfree iso ? It is still non free, which means it was not released. (Sorry)
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mageia 2 Alpha 3 available for tests
Le jeudi 12 janvier 2012 à 21:04 +0100, Anne nicolas a écrit : > Hi all > > Mageia 2 Alpha 3 is now available for tests: > http://blog.mageia.org/en/2012/01/12/here-comes-mageia-2-alpha3/ > > Please note that only DVDs isos are available for now. Live CDs will > be uploaded next week, due to some issues with dracut migration. > > Thanks for all the hard work and enjoy it! > Hello, any news about the nonfree iso ?
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Thierry Vignaud wrote: > On 13 January 2012 02:30, dams wrote: >> dams 1.4.9-1.mga1: >> + Revision: 195501 >> - Update BR to install libmjpegtools-devel instead of mjpegtools-devel > > why? Because in mageia 1 mjpegtools doesn't have a provide %name-devel
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Chris Evans a écrit : *From:* Claire Robinson *To:* mageia-dev@mageia.org *Sent:* Friday, January 13, 2012 6:45 AM *Subject:* Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote: > Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +, Claire Robinson a écrit : >> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: >>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: >>> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: > see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- > extended-support-release/ > see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png > > ESR is a 1y extended supported release... > > looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release > schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards > FF11 for our release. > > We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our > chance! > > ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the > regular releases... ) > > i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. Why not? * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our main problem goes away). * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). * We will miss too many new and cool features. * When we release >>> >>> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception >>> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no >>> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. >>> >> >> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the >> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. >> >> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date >> with. > > All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non > technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not > know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it > up to date, so firefox is nothing special. > >> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something >> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. > > Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. > Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). > So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. > > Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 > weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string > change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. > >> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think >> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or >> maybe even offer both? > > Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, > and have no advantages by using the long supported release. > > And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to > reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the > distribution. My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect to be updated. IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :) (previous post) This really doesn't make sense. The browser is our interface to the internet. I (as a user) feel a need to have the latest version of my browser complete with all security patches. I really couldn't care less if I have the latest gnome or kde. Surfing the net using a browser with known security issues bothers me. I think this is why so many people consider firefox to be an exception to the rule. Where most software that is older is considered to be more stable, when talking about a browser it is generally the opposite. It would be nice to at least give the users a choice, maybe have the LTR version as well as the latest release available. I have seen other distros provide chrome stable, testing, and unstable. Allowing the user to choose which version they are most comfortable with. Wait. A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly security bugs, but doesn't add new features. Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new bugs, and so would be more secure. (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new features.) So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer a
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 05:13 -0800, Chris Evans a écrit : > This really doesn't make sense. The browser is our interface to the > internet. I (as a user) feel a need to have the latest version of my > browser complete with all security patches. What do you think that a long supported firefox be, if not a firefox with proper security patches ? And frankly, if Firefox is so important to people because, doesn't t warrant to be extra careful with it, and to not change it every day ? "that's important to me, so please risk breaking it every 6 week" is just non sense. And yet, that's basically what people seems to assume. > I really couldn't care less if I have the latest gnome or kde. Surfing > the net using a browser with known security issues bothers me. Again, what do you think that Firefox ESR is ? "let's distribute a tarball with know security holes" ? > I think this is why so many people consider firefox to be an exception > to the rule. Where most software that is older is considered to be > more stable, when talking about a browser it is generally the > opposite. It would be nice to at least give the users a choice, There is already the choice. People can do the work themself, they can get the binary bundle from Mozilla, they can run cauldron. So please, stop using the choice argument when it doesn't correspond to reality. > maybe have the LTR version as well as the latest release available. I > have seen other distros provide chrome stable, testing, and unstable. > Allowing the user to choose which version they are most comfortable > with. That's also a pain to have it updated every X weeks. -- Michael Scherer
Re: [Mageia-dev] Existing Cauldron VM users willing to test gnome-boxes?
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 03:09:21PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote: > On Friday, 13 January 2012 11:47:39 Olav Vitters wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 06:14:46PM -0500, Scott Chevalley wrote: > > > I'm using KVM for a windows 7 vm and I just tried to use gnome-boxes to > > > create, I guess, a vm for a drbl live cd and it created it but when I > > > launch it the app just shows a black screen and doesn't do anything. > > > > Thanks for testing! > > > > I'm getting the same black screen. > > Have you tried connecting with spicec ? I connected using the spice gtk client. Same black screen. So I guess it has to do with the server (qemu spice support). Fedora qemu package had a lot of spice patches, all merged in qemu 1.0. Upstream said it shouldn't be needed to apply the patches though (and I didn't). There was also some other spice client, maybe spicec, but that depended on yet another package (cegui or something), but an older version than what Cauldron had. Upstream said they'd replace it with a gtk version (which I already packaged), so I excluded the old client from the spice package. > > So it seems it doesn't work anyone :-( > > > > Did you launch it from the terminal? Any debug output? > > > > > There's not much documentation so I'm not sure exactly what's supposed to > > > happen versus what is happening. > > > > You should be seeing the VM. It uses something new called 'splice'. I > > think that is where the error lies. The Fedora version of qemu 0.15 had > > some patches which they dropped in qemu 1.0. I'm hoping qemu 1.0 solves > > the issues, but wasn't able to compile it yesterday. > > > > "Splice" is pretty nice as you can e.g. share your USB somehow between > > the host and the VM (gnome-boxes has a checkbox, but no clue about the > > technical details). > > I think you mean 'spice', which is a remote desktop protocol, which covers > display, sound, device sharing, printing etc. (AFAIU). Indeed :) > I am more interested in the spice support in the libvirt/virt-manager tools > ... but I am not running cauldron. I think I changed libvirt to support spice, but not sure. I'm focussing on gnome-boxes and I had to package a lot of things to get it to actually run a VM. Virt-manager does work though (started Mageia 1 dvd in a VM). > > > I'll be happy to do some more testing if you can give me some pointers as > > > to what I'm looking for. > > > > The debug output from the terminal would be nice, as well as > > $HOME/.libvirt/qemu/log/*. > > > > I really want to get this working before the next Mageia testversion is > > released.. > > I would like to see virt-manager with spice support, and support in the > distribution for spice when a VM under qemu with spice support (spice-vdagent > stuff). Any pointers on how to add support in the distribution? I guess maybe I should try to make a VM in gnome-boxes and start a Fedora iso. -- Regards, Olav
Re: [Mageia-dev] please stop doing "bugs" for updating magia 1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM, andre999 wrote: > Christian Lohmaier a écrit : >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Christian Lohmaier >>> wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste wrote: > [..] > To make things entirely clear, the agreed base policy (in various meetings) > was that updates should contain no new features. Thus in general, a > (verified) bug fix only release from upstream would qualify as an update. > This being subject to exceptions, which were later agreed on after much > discussion. Thanks - this is the first time this has been stated explicitly. > I don't really see the point of doing all this arguing about a wiki page > that doesn't completely accord with update policy. We just have to fix the > wiki page. Well - if you don't bother whether your policies are correct, you should not bother to publish them in the first place but refer to "whatever was discussed on the mailinglists". Yes, you have to fix the wiki page. But judging from this discussion people did not know what really is correct. The arguing is not about the wiki-page, but about the policy that is reflected by that wiki page. You did now clarify the policy as it should be, and that is fine. But please understand that the written policy did reflect a completely different picture. >> Yes, but this then changes the policy drastically (for the better, so >> please change it) > > It is not that drastic a change. The effect is essentially the same, No, It is a drastic change from what is written. It probably is no big difference compared to what people actually do today, but the policy is changed drastically by this change. > although it is of course much easier -- and generally safer -- to apply a > (verified) bug fix only release from upstream. > As stated above, and mentioned by others posting to this thread, the wiki > page does not accurately affect the policy. Well, you might have a different interpretation of this thread, but I see people strongly supporting the policy as is written on the wiki, so it is far from clear. >> And when I write "whatever is against the policy" - I'm referring to >> what is written in the wiki, not what people actually do. > > Policy is what was agreed on, and not any errors that may exist in what is > written in the wiki. We have corrected many similar errors in the wiki. If things were so clear, than people could have written exactly what you did and not continue with this discussion for so long. > Calling your understanding of the policy "stupid" is not necessarily the > most diplomatic approach. Again: I did judge what is written in the wiki. When policies are published, I have no other choice than to assume that what is written reflects the policy that was discussed and decided upon. And while it might not be diplomatic, I for sure prefer people actually writing what they mean. I of course fully agree that just writing "foo sucks" without stating how foo could suck less is inappropriate/waste of time. But well - thanks for making a concrete statement of what the policy /actually/ is. ciao Christian
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Michael Scherer a écrit : Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +, Claire Robinson a écrit : On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- extended-support-release/ see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png ESR is a 1y extended supported release... looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards FF11 for our release. We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our chance! ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the regular releases... ) i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? I'd say let's go for the long-term release, and let those wanting the latest and greatest use the upstream version. 1) Upstream will release probably at least a week before we could release it as an update. With a 6-week release cycle, we will always be lagging. 2) Mozilla (Firefox/Seamonkey/Thunderbird) is very conservative in their requires, and their rpm for mdv (and thus mga) menus are well done, so newer upstream versions are highly unlikely to have any problems on install. (Note that upstream Mozilla required libstdc++5 long after mdv had migrated to libstdc++6 and had later dropped libstdc++5.) I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. Why not? * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our main problem goes away). * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). * We will miss too many new and cool features. * When we release We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. Exactly. The fewer such exceptions the better, where alternatives exist. With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. Sure, but not every 6 weeks whether there is a bug fix or not. On the average in the last few years, significant bug fixes in Firefox/Seamonkey have been more like every 2 or 3 months. Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date with. All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it up to date, so firefox is nothing special. It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. We will always be at least a week behind Firefox's latest release. So where do you think those really wanting the "latest and greatest" will go ? Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. +1 I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or maybe even offer both? Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, and have no advantages by using the long supported release. And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the distribution. -- André
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
From: Claire Robinson To: mageia-dev@mageia.org Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 6:45 AM Subject: Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote: > Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +, Claire Robinson a écrit : >> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: >>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: >>> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: > see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- > extended-support-release/ > see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png > > ESR is a 1y extended supported release... > > looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month > release > schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go > towards > FF11 for our release. > > We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our > chance! > > ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the > regular releases... ) > > i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. Why not? * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our main problem goes away). * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). * We will miss too many new and cool features. * When we release >>> >>> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception >>> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no >>> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. >>> >> >> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the >> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. >> >> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date >> with. > > All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non > technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not > know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it > up to date, so firefox is nothing special. > >> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something >> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. > > Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. > Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). > So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. > > Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 > weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string > change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. > >> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think >> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or >> maybe even offer both? > > Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, > and have no advantages by using the long supported release. > > And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to > reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the > distribution. My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect to be updated. IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :) This really doesn't make sense. The browser is our interface to the internet. I (as a user) feel a need to have the latest version of my browser complete with all security patches. I really couldn't care less if I have the latest gnome or kde. Surfing the net using a browser with known security issues bothers me. I think this is why so many people consider firefox to be an exception to the rule. Where most software that is older is considered to be more stable, when talking about a browser it is generally the opposite. It would be nice to at least give the users a choice, maybe have the LTR version as well as the latest release available. I have seen other distros provide chrome stable, testing, and unstable. Allowing the user to choose which version they are most comfortable with.
Re: [Mageia-dev] Existing Cauldron VM users willing to test gnome-boxes?
On Friday, 13 January 2012 11:47:39 Olav Vitters wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 06:14:46PM -0500, Scott Chevalley wrote: > > I'm using KVM for a windows 7 vm and I just tried to use gnome-boxes to > > create, I guess, a vm for a drbl live cd and it created it but when I > > launch it the app just shows a black screen and doesn't do anything. > > Thanks for testing! > > I'm getting the same black screen. Have you tried connecting with spicec ? > So it seems it doesn't work anyone :-( > > Did you launch it from the terminal? Any debug output? > > > There's not much documentation so I'm not sure exactly what's supposed to > > happen versus what is happening. > > You should be seeing the VM. It uses something new called 'splice'. I > think that is where the error lies. The Fedora version of qemu 0.15 had > some patches which they dropped in qemu 1.0. I'm hoping qemu 1.0 solves > the issues, but wasn't able to compile it yesterday. > > "Splice" is pretty nice as you can e.g. share your USB somehow between > the host and the VM (gnome-boxes has a checkbox, but no clue about the > technical details). I think you mean 'spice', which is a remote desktop protocol, which covers display, sound, device sharing, printing etc. (AFAIU). I am more interested in the spice support in the libvirt/virt-manager tools ... but I am not running cauldron. > > I'll be happy to do some more testing if you can give me some pointers as > > to what I'm looking for. > > The debug output from the terminal would be nice, as well as > $HOME/.libvirt/qemu/log/*. > > I really want to get this working before the next Mageia testversion is > released.. I would like to see virt-manager with spice support, and support in the distribution for spice when a VM under qemu with spice support (spice-vdagent stuff). Regards, Buchan
Re: [Mageia-dev] "Hear, hear" usage
Hi Oliver, *, On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Oliver Burger wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2012, 22:43:54 schrieb Florian Hubold: >> > On 01/12/2012 04:17 PM, Johnny A. Solbu wrote: >> >> As far as I understand, that is a common British thing to do when one >> >> agree >> >> with the current speaker. Thanks for the explanation :-) >> Well, directly translating this phrase into german, it has another meaning. >> Used in colloquial language, it means something like ironically saying >> "well, look at that" or "enough with this nonsense" but also in the form >> Johnny used it. > You must have a different dirct translation than me. Directly translating it > into German makes no sense at all :D It does make sense, as the exact same phrase "Hört, hört" exists in German - but just like Florian I know the double-meaning that can both mean full approval (as the English meaning), but is also used as "look at that guy, he is deconstructing his own argumentation/he is making a fool of himself/the topic". The double-meaning probably is depending on geographical region. (like for example "Matz" in regional dialect - I know it as a (positive) term for a self-confident, boldfaced/fresh/cheeky girl, while just 50km westwards it is a rather harsh curse word for a "mean/angry bitch") > But you should never translate anything directly between languages... Sure - but if you don't understand a phrase/saying, all you can do is to directly translate it and see whether you can make sense of it. In this case it was ambiguous (at least for me), as the tone of the voice, the other sources of information were missing. It's like the phrase "Der Lehrer sagt mein Vater ist ein Esel" - without the missing punctuation this sentence can have two rather different meanings. No problem when you hear it, but when you read it like that you can only guess who called whom a donkey. And that was my point - what works perfectly fine in real life, in direct interaction - might not work as well when you only have text written on screen - so thanks again for clearing up the dust from this expression :-) ciao Christian
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote: Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +, Claire Robinson a écrit : On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- extended-support-release/ see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png ESR is a 1y extended supported release... looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards FF11 for our release. We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our chance! ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the regular releases... ) i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. Why not? * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our main problem goes away). * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). * We will miss too many new and cool features. * When we release We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date with. All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it up to date, so firefox is nothing special. It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or maybe even offer both? Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, and have no advantages by using the long supported release. And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the distribution. My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect to be updated. IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :)
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +, Claire Robinson a écrit : > On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: > > > >> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: > >>> see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- > >>> extended-support-release/ > >>> see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png > >>> > >>> ESR is a 1y extended supported release... > >>> > >>> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month > >>> release > >>> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go > >>> towards > >>> FF11 for our release. > >>> > >>> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our > >>> chance! > >>> > >>> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the > >>> regular releases... ) > >>> > >>> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? > >> I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. > >> > >> Why not? > >> * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our > >> main problem goes away). > >> * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower > >> popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). > >> * We will miss too many new and cool features. > >> * When we release > > > > We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception > > on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no > > reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. > > > > With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the > lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. > > Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date > with. All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it up to date, so firefox is nothing special. > It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something > reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. > I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think > for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or > maybe even offer both? Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, and have no advantages by using the long supported release. And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the distribution. -- Michael Scherer
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- extended-support-release/ see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png ESR is a 1y extended supported release... looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards FF11 for our release. We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our chance! ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the regular releases... ) i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. Why not? * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our main problem goes away). * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). * We will miss too many new and cool features. * When we release We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date with. It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or maybe even offer both? Claire
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mageia 2 Alpha 3 available for tests
On 12/01/12 21:04, Anne nicolas wrote: Hi all Mageia 2 Alpha 3 is now available for tests: http://blog.mageia.org/en/2012/01/12/here-comes-mageia-2-alpha3/ Hi, tested the boot.iso with network install; everything went fine. At boot however, systemd exhibited some failures (apparently they are harmless though): UNIT LOAD ACTIVE SUBJOB DESCRIPTION fedora-loadmodules.service loaded ESC[1;31mfailed failedESC[0m Load legacy module configuration systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service loaded ESC[1;31mfailed failedESC[0m Cleanup of Temporary Directories systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service loaded ESC[1;31mfailed failedESC[0m Recreate Volatile Files and Directories udisksd.serviceloaded ESC[1;31mfailed failedESC[0m UDisks Daemon upowerd.serviceloaded ESC[1;31mfailed failedESC[0m UPower Daemon Cheers, Chris.
Re: [Mageia-dev] "Hear, hear" usage
Am 13.01.2012 09:01, schrieb Oliver Burger: Am Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2012, 22:43:54 schrieb Florian Hubold: On 01/12/2012 04:17 PM, Johnny A. Solbu wrote: As far as I understand, that is a common British thing to do when one agree with the current speaker. Well, directly translating this phrase into german, it has another meaning. Used in colloquial language, it means something like ironically saying "well, look at that" or "enough with this nonsense" but also in the form Johnny used it. You must have a different dirct translation than me. Directly translating it into German makes no sense at all :D I would translate it with "Hört! Hört!", which isn't used anymore, but is still understandable. Regards, Thorsten
Re: [Mageia-dev] "Hear, hear" usage
On 13 January 2012 09:01, Oliver Burger wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2012, 22:43:54 schrieb Florian Hubold: >> > On 01/12/2012 04:17 PM, Johnny A. Solbu wrote: >> >> As far as I understand, that is a common British thing to do when one >> >> agree >> >> with the current speaker. >> Well, directly translating this phrase into german, it has another meaning. >> Used in colloquial language, it means something like ironically saying >> "well, look at that" or "enough with this nonsense" but also in the form >> Johnny used it. > You must have a different dirct translation than me. Directly translating it > into German makes no sense at all :D > > But you should never translate anything directly between languages... > > Oliver It came about because you aren't allouud to clap in parliment, so to express your approve, hear hear is used.
Re: [Mageia-dev] Existing Cauldron VM users willing to test gnome-boxes?
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 06:14:46PM -0500, Scott Chevalley wrote: > I'm using KVM for a windows 7 vm and I just tried to use gnome-boxes to > create, > I guess, a vm for a drbl live cd and it created it but when I launch it the > app > just shows a black screen and doesn't do anything. Thanks for testing! I'm getting the same black screen. So it seems it doesn't work anyone :-( Did you launch it from the terminal? Any debug output? > There's not much documentation so I'm not sure exactly what's supposed to > happen > versus what is happening. You should be seeing the VM. It uses something new called 'splice'. I think that is where the error lies. The Fedora version of qemu 0.15 had some patches which they dropped in qemu 1.0. I'm hoping qemu 1.0 solves the issues, but wasn't able to compile it yesterday. "Splice" is pretty nice as you can e.g. share your USB somehow between the host and the VM (gnome-boxes has a checkbox, but no clue about the technical details). > I'll be happy to do some more testing if you can give me some pointers as to > what I'm looking for. The debug output from the terminal would be nice, as well as $HOME/.libvirt/qemu/log/*. I really want to get this working before the next Mageia testversion is released.. -- Regards, Olav
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: > 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: >> see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- >> extended-support-release/ >> see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png >> >> ESR is a 1y extended supported release... >> >> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release >> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards >> FF11 for our release. >> >> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our >> chance! >> >> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the >> regular releases... ) >> >> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? > I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. > > Why not? > * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our > main problem goes away). > * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower > popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). > * We will miss too many new and cool features. > * When we release We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version.
Re: [Mageia-dev] please stop doing "bugs" for updating magia 1
Christian Lohmaier a écrit : On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste wrote: [..] As I said, no one is talking about picking up a fix if there's a bug fix only release, it's for when it isn't and we need to reduce the chance of regressions by taking the modifications that *exactly* fix that bug. I strongly disagree. The policy is stating the exact opposite. And also Michael seems to defend the policy as it is written, and not your interpretation here. No, I'm doing exactly as the policy says, patch current stable version. But then you're *not* doing as the policy says, as policy says: "same version of the package *released with the distribution*" So whatever version that ended up in the initial release of the distro. Not what is available upstream. To make things entirely clear, the agreed base policy (in various meetings) was that updates should contain no new features. Thus in general, a (verified) bug fix only release from upstream would qualify as an update. This being subject to exceptions, which were later agreed on after much discussion. Of course, to conform with our base policy of no new features in updates, if an upstream release contains any new features (and doesn't qualify for the exceptions), then bug fixes obviously have to be applied in patches. (Which is probably why the editor of the wiki page erred.) (Other factors, such as version number dependancies, would have to be considered as well.) In other respects, this page accords with agreed policy. I don't really see the point of doing all this arguing about a wiki page that doesn't completely accord with update policy. We just have to fix the wiki page. The thing about bugfix only releases is something that it seems packagers have been doing implicitly as pterjan said before, and needs to be added to the policy. Yes, but this then changes the policy drastically (for the better, so please change it) It is not that drastic a change. The effect is essentially the same, although it is of course much easier -- and generally safer -- to apply a (verified) bug fix only release from upstream. As stated above, and mentioned by others posting to this thread, the wiki page does not accurately affect the policy. (It is focusing on a means of complying with the policy, rather than the policy itself.) And when I write "whatever is against the policy" - I'm referring to what is written in the wiki, not what people actually do. Policy is what was agreed on, and not any errors that may exist in what is written in the wiki. We have corrected many similar errors in the wiki. Calling your understanding of the policy "stupid" is not necessarily the most diplomatic approach. ciao Christian Regards -- André
Re: [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1
On 13 January 2012 02:30, dams wrote: > dams 1.4.9-1.mga1: > + Revision: 195501 > - Update BR to install libmjpegtools-devel instead of mjpegtools-devel why?
Re: [Mageia-dev] please stop doing "bugs" for updating magia 1
On Thursday, 12 January 2012 22:25:51 Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Florian Hubold wrote: > > Am 12.01.2012 19:01, schrieb Christian Lohmaier: > >>> [..] > > > > PS: Maybe next time you could improve on your wording, the policy may > > currently be incorrect, not reflecting good packaging practices, but as > > it's only a policy written by humans, it's not dumb. Just a hint. ;) > > No, I disagree. The policy as written is dumb in my opinion. I wouldn't say it is dumb, I would say it is conservative. Can you off-hand provide a list of which of our ~10 000 packages have a 'maintained bugfix only branch with regular releases' policy? I would expect it is less than 5%. Granted, this may include a number of large/important packages. But, I can also post some counter-examples: -samba (but, it may be useful to have some not-strictly-bugfix changes, as some are 'compatability with the new SP of some other popular OS') -openldap > If you publish a policy, and the policy is incorrect, the whole > process of using policies is worthless. So I /have/ to assume that the > policy reflects the decisions/conclusions from the discussions by > people running the project. I think some of the existing policies may have been done in haste. IMHO, there should be a policy on policies, covering how they are agreed upon, how amendments are agreed up etc. > To me it stays a silly/stupid policy. Please provide a proposal for changes to the policy. Regards, Buchan
Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Sander Lepik wrote: > 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: > >> see https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox- >> extended-support-release/ >> see https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png >> >> ESR is a 1y extended supported release... >> >> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month >> release >> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go >> towards >> FF11 for our release. >> >> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our >> chance! >> >> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the >> regular releases... ) >> >> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? > > I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. > > Why not? > * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our > main problem goes away). > * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower > popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). > * We will miss too many new and cool features. > * When we release > > But as i said.. up to maintainer. A reason can be that a new version can need new versions of external stuffs ( like nss, nspr, sqlite3, ... )
Re: [Mageia-dev] "Hear, hear" usage
Am Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2012, 22:43:54 schrieb Florian Hubold: > > On 01/12/2012 04:17 PM, Johnny A. Solbu wrote: > >> As far as I understand, that is a common British thing to do when one > >> agree > >> with the current speaker. > Well, directly translating this phrase into german, it has another meaning. > Used in colloquial language, it means something like ironically saying > "well, look at that" or "enough with this nonsense" but also in the form > Johnny used it. You must have a different dirct translation than me. Directly translating it into German makes no sense at all :D But you should never translate anything directly between languages... Oliver
