Re: [Test-Announce] Call for reviewing TCMS use cases and comparison!
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 23:05 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 19:02 +, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: I do like litmus! It's a nice evolution from testopia for upstream mozilla. We don't currently have an 'unclear' test result. I'm not opposed to it, but would need better understand how that field is used, and the process around it, in litmus. Agree with James. What I believe Mozilla is doing (since I have not had a chance to work with their QA team yet) is flagging test cases with a form of soft failure in that the result of a testcase neither clearly passed, nor clearly failed. So in addition to Passed, Failed, and any other common states (Blocked, In Progress, etc.) you have an Unclear result state. I didn't receive the mail replied by Samuel. Weird. Hurry is somewhat wrong to say we don't currently have an 'unclear' result; we do have the 'warn' result, which is in some ways similar. We usually use it to indicate when a test turns up some kind of anomalous behaviour which isn't exactly a failure. It depends on what 'unclear' means here and how it reflects the results. If you mean a soft failure or an issue that doesn't block the case run, the 'warn' result is similar to it, then calling it 'unclear' is confusing and not accurate in my opinion. In nitrate system, it has 'blocked', 'failed' and 'error' result status to reflect a problem. User guide suggests 'error' is used for test environment that has problems that prevent Test Case execution. I think we can modify 'error' status to include all soft failures. I've added this to the requirements for further evaluation. Thanks, Hurry -- Contacts Hurry FAS Name: Rhe Timezone: UTC+8 TEL: 86-010-62608141 IRC nick: rhe #fedora-qa #fedora-zh -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Dne 25.1.2011 07:59, Adam Williamson napsal(a): But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I would suggest just to give up. Dependencies in RPM packages in Fedora haven't meant anything for a long time already. Improvements are ignored (am I allowed to say Suggests/Recommends here?), bugs against broken dependencies WONTFIXed or ignored as well (try to run Rawhide and upgrade just some packages and do it repeatedly for a long time ... you will collect a lot of nice WONTFIXes). They mean only whatever form of abuse anybody treats them to currently. Matěj -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 25.1.2011 07:59, Adam Williamson napsal(a): But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I would suggest just to give up. Dependencies in RPM packages in Fedora haven't meant anything for a long time already. Improvements are ignored (am I allowed to say Suggests/Recommends here?), bugs against broken dependencies WONTFIXed or ignored as well (try to run Rawhide and upgrade just some packages and do it repeatedly for a long time ... you will collect a lot of nice WONTFIXes). Actually if your speaking for the Red Hat desktop team I agree with your point because its clear they have an I'm right Jack, everything for gnome shell attitude so screw everyone else and it seems from my point of view that they clearly couldn't give a stuff about anyone else but themselves. And that attitude sucks and I'm getting sick of going around my packages and spending a lot of time cleaning up the mess of when one of that team comes and makes a mess all over the place. In terms of dependencies for gnome 3 you may be right but for every other part of the distribution you are completely wrong, at least on this space time continuum. There are quite a number of people fixing dependency problems and its attitudes like this that really piss me off. We got finally rid of perl in the last release which regained quite a bit of space for just about all spins for a net win. The Mobility SIG (mostly me but others as well), the server SIG and the AOS/JeOS/Virt SIG have been working consistently for a long time (me for 3 or more years) to try and fix these issues so that is why I'm getting a little upset on the attitude. Just because in your world you have terabytes of space and internet connections in the tens or even hundreds of megs a second there's a LOT of places in the world that don't have that luxury or have to pay a lot (like multiple dollars per gig of download) for bandwidth so saving a 100 meg here and there is worthwhile. I've spoken to a lot of people that are moving from Fedora to Debian and other distros for this exact reason. Another classic example of this is updates to openoffice. There have been 10 updates @ 200Mb odd MB each for oo.o since the release of F-14 for such critical bugs as background isn't transparent [1] surely these could be bundled together once a month or so (I thought there was suppose to be a policy about this but I can't find it). Peter They mean only whatever form of abuse anybody treats them to currently. [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openoffice.org-3.3.0-20.1.fc14 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 04:11 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: this exact reason. Another classic example of this is updates to openoffice. There have been 10 updates @ 200Mb odd MB each for oo.o since the release of F-14 for such critical bugs as background isn't transparent [1] surely these could be bundled together once a month or so (I thought there was suppose to be a policy about this but I can't find it). There isn't any such policy suggesting or requiring bundling of bug fixes and trying to mandate it via policy doesn't really seem feasible. We could talk to the maintainers in question and understand what happened first before trying to stop it. If it isn't a one off problem, then it makes sense to discuss it in the broader context. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 04:11 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: this exact reason. Another classic example of this is updates to openoffice. There have been 10 updates @ 200Mb odd MB each for oo.o since the release of F-14 for such critical bugs as background isn't transparent [1] surely these could be bundled together once a month or so (I thought there was suppose to be a policy about this but I can't find it). There isn't any such policy suggesting or requiring bundling of bug fixes and trying to mandate it via policy doesn't really seem feasible. We could talk to the maintainers in question and understand what happened first before trying to stop it. If it isn't a one off problem, then it makes sense to discuss it in the broader context. The number of updates in a stable release has been discussed, at length. There was even discussion of implementing a policy for it but it clearly was never done. Peter -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 05:04 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: The number of updates in a stable release has been discussed, at length. There was even discussion of implementing a policy for it but it clearly was never done A policy does exist but says nothing about bundling bug fixes http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
2011/1/25 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 04:11 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: this exact reason. Another classic example of this is updates to openoffice. There have been 10 updates @ 200Mb odd MB each for oo.o since the release of F-14 for such critical bugs as background isn't transparent [1] surely these could be bundled together once a month or so (I thought there was suppose to be a policy about this but I can't find it). There isn't any such policy suggesting or requiring bundling of bug fixes and trying to mandate it via policy doesn't really seem feasible. We could talk to the maintainers in question and understand what happened first before trying to stop it. If it isn't a one off problem, then it makes sense to discuss it in the broader context. The number of updates in a stable release has been discussed, at length. There was even discussion of implementing a policy for it but it clearly was never done. another thing that can be done is somehow encouraging the creation of delta rpms, especially for big packages (like ooo). -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 05:51 PM, cornel panceac wrote: another thing that can be done is somehow encouraging the creation of delta rpms, especially for big packages (like ooo). We already do generate deltarpm. There was a bug in the process which has been fixed. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide? {Updates Policy}
On 01/25/11 06:59, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 01/25/2011 05:04 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
The number of updates in a stable release has been discussed, at
length. There was even discussion of implementing a policy for it but
it clearly was never done
A policy does exist but says nothing about bundling bug fixes
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
Rahul
Two related policies are kind-of/sort-of there. The document does state
that Package maintainers MUST: {...} Avoid updates that are trivial or
don't affect any Fedora users. The tough question is to define
trivial, and perhaps there may need to be some threshold of expected
affected users before a patch is rolled out to everyone.
There also is the philosophy for stable releases that The update rate
for any given release should drop off over time, which presumes that as
bugfixes are added less future ones should be needed. (Not that
everyone is working on the next release, which probably is also true.)
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
2011/1/25 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com On 01/25/2011 05:51 PM, cornel panceac wrote: another thing that can be done is somehow encouraging the creation of delta rpms, especially for big packages (like ooo). We already do generate deltarpm. There was a bug in the process which has been fixed. thank you -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 12:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins. But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install GNOME Shell specifically. A upgrade needn't pull in GNOME Shell. No users upgrading should not get a degraded user experience (that is what the fallback supposed to be), to save a few MB of disk space for some users that care about every single MB on their hard drive. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:34 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 12:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins. But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install GNOME Shell specifically. A upgrade needn't pull in GNOME Shell. No users upgrading should not get a degraded user experience (that is what the fallback supposed to be), to save a few MB of disk space for some users that care about every single MB on their hard drive. I've not ever asked for a degraded user experience what I'm asking for it not to put dependency hacks to fix a problem that should be fixed in some other way. Please don't put this out of context. Peter -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:34 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 12:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins. But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install GNOME Shell specifically. A upgrade needn't pull in GNOME Shell. No users upgrading should not get a degraded user experience (that is what the fallback supposed to be), to save a few MB of disk space for some users that care about every single MB on their hard drive. I've not ever asked for a degraded user experience what I'm asking for it not to put dependency hacks to fix a problem that should be fixed in some other way. Please don't put this out of context. I have replied to *Rahul's* mail not yours where he said A upgrade needn't pull in GNOME Shell (I didn't even mention how this should be done but having the user installing it by hand post upgrade is just wrong). So please don't put this out of context. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 07:04 PM, drago01 wrote No users upgrading should not get a degraded user experience (that is what the fallback supposed to be), to save a few MB of disk space for some users that care about every single MB on their hard drive. That is a gross mischaracterization of people are expecting in this discussion. For one, the fallback mode provides pretty much the same experience as before the upgrade and doesn't degrade it. I don't care about every single MB on my hard drive however randomly adding artificial dependencies to packages cannot be the solution for providing the upgrade experience you want to provide. If you want to tackle that problem, it is a much bigger one (defaults change, new packages get added, some cleanup might be needed etc) and needs to be handled differently. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Rawhide nightly builds - last couple of days
Hey everyone, just popping in to ask if anyone has been able to boot any of the last 3-5 nightly isos? Before that you had to drop out of gdm and X startx manually, install hal so liveinst would work etc but at least it booted. Now I only get unreadable signs after plymouth nad no reaction whatsoever to any input. greetings -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:41 +, Peter Robinson wrote: Actually if your speaking for the Red Hat desktop team I agree with your point because its clear they have an I'm right Jack, everything for gnome shell attitude so screw everyone else and it seems from my point of view that they clearly couldn't give a stuff about anyone else but themselves. And that attitude sucks and I'm getting sick of going around my packages and spending a lot of time cleaning up the mess of when one of that team comes and makes a mess all over the place. Is that really necessary ? Can we have at least one mailing list where we refrain from name-calling and accusatory language, please ? In terms of dependencies for gnome 3 you may be right but for every other part of the distribution you are completely wrong, at least on this space time continuum. There are quite a number of people fixing dependency problems and its attitudes like this that really piss me off. We got finally rid of perl in the last release which regained quite a bit of space for just about all spins for a net win. The Mobility SIG (mostly me but others as well), the server SIG and the AOS/JeOS/Virt SIG have been working consistently for a long time (me for 3 or more years) to try and fix these issues so that is why I'm getting a little upset on the attitude. The desktop team has not brought perl back. It is getting pulled in by cups, indirectly. Please be at least a little more careful with your accusations. Thanks. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 19:31:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: That is a gross mischaracterization of people are expecting in this discussion. For one, the fallback mode provides pretty much the same experience as before the upgrade and doesn't degrade it. I don't care I think you want the future tense there. The fallback mode doesn't work currently if you don't have gnome-shell installed. about every single MB on my hard drive however randomly adding artificial dependencies to packages cannot be the solution for providing the upgrade experience you want to provide. If you want to tackle that problem, it is a much bigger one (defaults change, new packages get added, some cleanup might be needed etc) and needs to be handled differently. I believe there was a claim that proper obsoletes and provides could potentially handle upgrades from older Fedora releases while not using hard dependencies. I did not see a detailed proposal on how this would be done though. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 16:54 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 01/25/2011 12:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same
for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins.
But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require
gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to
make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient.
I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the
fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install
GNOME Shell specifically. A upgrade needn't pull in GNOME Shell.
GNOME Panel is a particularly bad place to have that additional
dependency because if I have a system that doesn't support GNOME Shell
or I just don't prefer to use it yet and I am only using the GNOME
Panel, it doesn't make sense to keep GNOME Shell installed.
No, it is really required that an upgrade gives you the intended
experience of the release you are upgrading to. We are working very hard
to make GNOME 3 good, and would like people to actually get whats on the
label when the upgrade to F15. I don't want to see reactions like
'Hey, I upgraded to F15 and really like that new GNOME 3 experience'
'Really ? I just upgraded, and it looks the same it always did :-('
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Rawhide nightly builds - last couple of days
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:15:55 +0100, peter_someone dionysosjuen...@hotmail.com wrote: Hey everyone, just popping in to ask if anyone has been able to boot any of the last 3-5 nightly isos? Before that you had to drop out of gdm and X startx manually, install hal so liveinst would work etc but at least it booted. Now I only get unreadable signs after plymouth nad no reaction whatsoever to any input. Yes (with the images on a usb drive). It sounds like hardware dependent video issues from your description. That time frame is about when 2.6.38 landed, so I wouldn't be too surprised that some hardware has problems. There have been some usb issues when usb devices are put to sleep and don't properly wake back up again. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 07:54 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 19:31:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: That is a gross mischaracterization of people are expecting in this discussion. For one, the fallback mode provides pretty much the same experience as before the upgrade and doesn't degrade it. I don't care I think you want the future tense there. The fallback mode doesn't work currently if you don't have gnome-shell installed. That will be fixed before release. So the discussion has to take that into account. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 08:03 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote
No, it is really required that an upgrade gives you the intended
experience of the release you are upgrading to. We are working very hard
to make GNOME 3 good, and would like people to actually get whats on the
label when the upgrade to F15. I don't want to see reactions like
'Hey, I upgraded to F15 and really like that new GNOME 3 experience'
'Really ? I just upgraded, and it looks the same it always did :-('
Add a note to the release notes or handle it in a different manner.
GNOME Shell is a alternative to GNOME Panel. Adding a dependency from
the latter to the former doesn't make any sense. It is a misuse of
dependency mechanism.
Rahul
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:41 +, Peter Robinson wrote: Actually if your speaking for the Red Hat desktop team I agree with your point because its clear they have an I'm right Jack, everything for gnome shell attitude so screw everyone else and it seems from my point of view that they clearly couldn't give a stuff about anyone else but themselves. And that attitude sucks and I'm getting sick of going around my packages and spending a lot of time cleaning up the mess of when one of that team comes and makes a mess all over the place. Is that really necessary ? Can we have at least one mailing list where we refrain from name-calling and accusatory language, please ? In terms of dependencies for gnome 3 you may be right but for every other part of the distribution you are completely wrong, at least on this space time continuum. There are quite a number of people fixing dependency problems and its attitudes like this that really piss me off. We got finally rid of perl in the last release which regained quite a bit of space for just about all spins for a net win. The Mobility SIG (mostly me but others as well), the server SIG and the AOS/JeOS/Virt SIG have been working consistently for a long time (me for 3 or more years) to try and fix these issues so that is why I'm getting a little upset on the attitude. The desktop team has not brought perl back. It is getting pulled in by cups, indirectly. Please be at least a little more careful with your accusations. Thanks. I wasn't accusing the desktop team of bringing back perl, I'm well aware where the dependency lies (plus net-snmp and others). It was the point above the one you cut out where one of the desktop team said I would suggest just to give up. Dependencies in RPM packages in Fedora haven't meant anything for a long time already. Peter -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 22:59 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins. But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. Make a better proposal then. Just doing nothing is not an option. The 'natural' place for the dependency would be gnome-session. I have put it in gnome-panel to help other spins who use gdm and might not want the extra baggage - and see how warmly probinson thanked me for it :-( But gnome-panel is the old way. It means anyone who can't use gnome-3 gets it and all its dependencies anyway. Its not a direct attack on you but there must be a better way to provide a seemless upgrade using comps groups or something similar. Peter -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/25/2011 08:17 PM, drago01 wrote: It is not indented as alternative to in the way you might think it is just a fallback for older hardware and/or crappy drivers. Hence the name fallback. Call it whatever you want. It is a alternative in the sense that you cannot run both at the same time. There is absolutely no technical reason why GNOME Panel would require GNOME Shell as a dependency. If you really care that much about it suggest a better way (no a release note entry is not it) If you are going to dismiss suggestions without any explanation, why would I bother? I though it was obvious that requiring the user to go read the release notes to get the expected user experience is just wrong. If you insist that a artificial dependency is the right way, then not much can be done about it. It isn't ideal but the costs are few megabytes of disk space versus the benefit of a better upgrade experience. Unless we have a better way (which we should have to handle cases like this), I'd take that cost. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 08:27 PM, drago01 wrote: I though it was obvious that requiring the user to go read the release notes to get the expected user experience is just wrong. I thought It was obvious that adding a dependency from GNOME Panel to GNOME Shell is just wrong too. It is natural that GNOME Shell developers want to provide that experience but that doesn't mean just adding a dependency somewhere randomly is the right idea. If users don't read the release notes, they are missing a number of changes in the user experience all the time. For instance, we change the default or add additional apps to the desktop group often and the users are missing that. If you insist that a artificial dependency is the right way, then not much can be done about it. It isn't ideal but the costs are few megabytes of disk space versus the benefit of a better upgrade experience. Unless we have a better way (which we should have to handle cases like this), I'd take that cost Others have explained what problems they are trying to solve other than disk space already. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 08:35 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote: Make a better proposal then. Just doing nothing is not an option. Why not? Please point to the Fedora policy that says this. -- Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 09:35:27 -0500, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 22:59 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:11 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: I've added the dependency to gnome-panel. That should achieve the same for gnome users on upgrade, without affecting other spins. But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. Make a better proposal then. Just doing nothing is not an option. The 'natural' place for the dependency would be gnome-session. I have put it in gnome-panel to help other spins who use gdm and might not want the extra baggage - and see how warmly probinson thanked me for it :-( How about this for a proposal: Have gnome shell obsolete gnome-panel 2.90 and require gnome-panel, metacity (since it needs these for fall back). I think that will do what you want. (Note there isn't a 2.9x version of metacity, so you obsoleting that gets a lot trickier.) As long as gnome-panel-2.9x isn't packaged in F13 or F14 as an update this should work. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:01, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote: Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) said: But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install GNOME Shell specifically. How so? When we included KDE 4, we didn't leave users on KDE 3 on upgrade. Similarly, when a user has GNOME installed (and yes, the gnome-panel is GNOME), and they upgrade, they'll get the current version of GNOME. And that's GNOME Shell. Thank you for repeating this. It appears to not be common knowledge--in this conversation--that gnome-panel is deprecated and, essentially, in deep maintenance mode. GNOME Shell is the UI of GNOME 3 and you only land on the fallback gnome-panel if your hardware doesn't support it or, if the detection logic doesn't guess your hardware correctly, you force GNOME in to fallback mode (modulo this UI being created before the release). -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On 01/25/2011 09:31 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: How so? When we included KDE 4, we didn't leave users on KDE 3 on upgrade. KDE 4 components obsoleted the KDE 3 equivalents. GNOME wants to provide both GNOME Shell and GNOME Panel for Fedora 15 users. So not quite the same situation. Similarly, when a user has GNOME installed (and yes, the gnome-panel is GNOME), and they upgrade, they'll get the current version of GNOME. And that's GNOME Shell. I might agree with the end result. Disagree with the implementation. Rahul -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Dne 25.1.2011 11:41, Peter Robinson napsal(a): Actually if your speaking for the Red Hat desktop team I agree with No, I am speaking (as always) just for myself. Matěj -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Does not this discussion belong on [1] were the Red Hat Desktop Team resides JBG 1. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Dne 25.1.2011 15:44, Rahul Sundaram napsal(a): I think you are missing context there. I read it as frustration from someone who works as a full time bug triager for that team rather than a serious suggestion. Let's stick to the technical discussions. Yes, sorry for my sarcasm not being obvious enough. However, I would strongly disagree with accusing only desktop team of this. IMHO, whole Fedora is to be blamed for this in all its parts. Matěj -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Announcing 389 Directory Server 1.2.8 Alpha 1 for testing
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability for testing of Alpha 1 of version 1.2.8. This release contains many bug fixes. On those platforms which have OpenLDAP built with Mozilla NSS crypto support (Fedora 14 and later), the packages are built with OpenLDAP instead of the Mozilla LDAP C SDK. WARNING: If you are upgrading from a previous 1.2.6 release candidate, you will need to run fixfiles to fix some SELinux AVCs, or directory server will not start. See bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622882 To fix, run this: fixfiles -R 389-ds-base restore If you are upgrading from 1.2.5 or earlier, or a stable 1.2.6 or 1.2.7, there is no problem. WARNING: If you are upgrading from a 1.2.6 alpha or release candidate, you will need to manually fix your entryrdn index files. See http://port389.org/wiki/Subtree_Rename#warning:_upgrade_from_389_v1.2.6_.28a.3F.2C_rc1_.7E_rc6.29_to_v1.2.6_rc6_or_newer for more information. If you are upgrading from 1.2.5 or earlier, or a 1.2.6 or 1.2.7 stable release, there is no problem. The new packages and versions are: * 389-ds-base 1.2.8.a1 ***We need your help! Please help us test this software.*** It is an Alpha release, so it may have a few glitches, but it has been tested for regressions and for new feature bugs. The Fedora system requires that packages go into Testing until verified and pushed to Stable. The more testing we get, the faster we can release these packages to Stable. See the Release Notes for information about how to provide testing feedback (or just send an email to 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org). === Installation === yum install --enablerepo=[updates-testing|epel-testing] 389-ds setup-ds-admin.pl === Upgrade === yum upgrade --enablerepo=[updates-testing|epel-testing] 389-ds-base setup-ds-admin.pl -u === Bugs Fixed === This release contains many bug fixes. The complete list of bugs fixed is found at the link below. Note that bugs marked as MODIFIED have been fixed but are still in testing. * Bug List for 389 1.2.8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=656390hide_resolved=0 * Release Notes - http://port389.org/wiki/Release_Notes * Install_Guide - http://port389.org/wiki/Install_Guide * Download - http://port389.org/wiki/Download ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote: Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) said: But it doesn't make any sense. gnome-panel does *not* require gnome-shell. We really shouldn't just go around abusing dependencies to make upgrades 'work', even if it is convenient. I think users upgrading from a previous release can continue to get the fallback mode unless they do a group installation or try to install GNOME Shell specifically. How so? When we included KDE 4, we didn't leave users on KDE 3 on upgrade. Similarly, when a user has GNOME installed (and yes, the gnome-panel is GNOME), and they upgrade, they'll get the current version of GNOME. And that's GNOME Shell. Unless of course they have no gnome-shell-capable hardware which may not be insignificant numbers! -- mike c -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 25.1.2011 11:41, Peter Robinson napsal(a): In terms of dependencies for gnome 3 you may be right but for every other part of the distribution you are completely wrong, at least on this space time continuum. There are quite a number of people fixing dependency problems and its attitudes like this that really piss me off. Try that experiment with Rawhide (updating just individual packages when you feel like you need more modern version of the particular pacakge; the trick is never to run unqualified yum upgrade for whole system). for 3 or more years) to try and fix these issues so that is why I'm getting a little upset on the attitude. Just to emphasize, I used to use Debian for many years, so I completely don't agree with the level of brokeness all Fedora packages requirements have IMHO. openoffice. There have been 10 updates @ 200Mb odd MB each for oo.o since the release of F-14 for such critical bugs as background isn't transparent [1] surely these could be bundled together once a month or so (I thought there was suppose to be a policy about this but I can't find it). Fortunately, presto makes miracles about OpenOffice, but again only if you regularly update complete distro. There's places where presto doesn't work well. And until recently it didn't work at all on openoffce because of the size. And in cases where you get lots of updates in a short period of time your out of luck. Which in a case where bandwidth is expensive you might not upgrade every time a patch comes our your in the situation where you have to download the whole thing. My point was that the kernel team for example commit a series of patches for a number of bugs and push a new version occasionally as opposed to pushing out multiple large updates to fix each corner case bug. Peter -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
kernel in rawhide (f15) : crash
maybe it's been reported already, but here both f15 kernels crash at boot. f14 works fine. # rpm -q kernel kernel-2.6.35.6-45.fc14.i686 kernel-2.6.38-0.rc2.git0.1.fc15.i686 kernel-2.6.38-0.rc2.git1.3.fc15.i686 processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5600+ ram: 2gb motherboard: Gigabyte M55S-S3 sorry, i can't send smoltProfile: # smoltSendProfile Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/bin/smoltSendProfile, line 39, in module import smolt File /usr/share/smolt/client/smolt.py, line 54, in module from devicelist import cat ImportError: No module named devicelist -- The beginning is the most important part of the work. -- *Plato* -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said: How about this for a proposal: Have gnome shell obsolete gnome-panel 2.90 and require gnome-panel, metacity (since it needs these for fall back). I think that will do what you want. (Note there isn't a 2.9x version of metacity, so you obsoleting that gets a lot trickier.) As long as gnome-panel-2.9x isn't packaged in F13 or F14 as an update this should work. I'm not sure that such an Obsoletes will do anything, as long as a gnome-panel = 2.90 is in F15. I checked with Seth et. al.; something like: Obsoletes: gnome-panel 2.90 Requires: gnome-panel = 2.90 *will* work. (Adjust for any epochs, of course.) Bill -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: What has happened to desktop icons in rawhide?
Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) said: I mostly agree but the difference in this case there is essentially a fork as the newer interface won't work on all devices that the old one previously did so you have circumstances where it just won't work or will crash horribly even on devices that are suppose to work (and to see that go and check the abrt bugs against mutter that say just crashed when I tried gnome-shell and the, in some cases, 100s of dupes). I see them every day when they hit my inbox as I originally packaged mutter and most of the gnome shell components for moblin (and now meego) so I'm well aware of the problems there are. Where as KDE 3 - 4 didn't have hardware incompatibilities and gnome has said they'll maintain both of the interfaces. That doesn't mean the interfaces are separate products, or need to be seperable components. Certainly not on upgrade. Bill -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: kernel in rawhide (f15) : crash
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 20:21 +0200, cornel panceac wrote: maybe it's been reported already, but here both f15 kernels crash at boot. f14 works fine. This is obviously highly hardware dependent, so your report isn't much use as is. =) The kernel boots on other hardware (like mine). So it'd be good to have more details of the crash, your hardware info, and a test with a 2.6.37 kernel build (I suspect this is likely a 2.6.38 regression). And you should probably file it, at redhat or upstream bugzilla. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: kernel in rawhide (f15) : crash
2011/1/25 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 20:21 +0200, cornel panceac wrote: maybe it's been reported already, but here both f15 kernels crash at boot. f14 works fine. This is obviously highly hardware dependent, so your report isn't much use as is. =) The kernel boots on other hardware (like mine). So it'd be good to have more details of the crash, your hardware info, and a test with a 2.6.37 kernel build (I suspect this is likely a 2.6.38 regression). And you should probably file it, at redhat or upstream bugzilla. probably the smolt profile (from f14) will be someday available here: http://www.smolts.org/client/show/pub_6da62aa6-7873-4da2-8803-4e5e6a3c5ff9 right now, the site is in guru_meditation state :) while the crash info was displayed, i've seen some mentions of plymouthd. video card is $ lspci -nn | grep -i vga 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation G73 [GeForce 7300 GT] [10de:0393] (rev a1) i'll try disabling the plymouthd service (if there is such thing) and report back. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Fedora QA] #159: Network Device Naming Test Day
#159: Network Device Naming Test Day +--- Reporter: shyamiyerdell | Owner: narendr...@dell.com Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 15 Component: Test Day | Version: Resolution: |Keywords: +--- Comment (by jlaska): I have created a i386 and x86_64 boot.iso images and updated the test day wiki with links. Note, after install there is a traceback (see [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672603 bug#672603]). I'm looking into getting more information to help resolve that bug. If that bug is resolved, I'll respin the images. Otherwise, we may have an updates.img to use. -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/159#comment:21 Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa Fedora Quality Assurance -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Fedora QA] #159: Network Device Naming Test Day
#159: Network Device Naming Test Day +--- Reporter: shyamiyerdell | Owner: narendr...@dell.com Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 15 Component: Test Day | Version: Resolution: |Keywords: +--- Comment (by narendrak): Thanks James. -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/159#comment:22 Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa Fedora Quality Assurance -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: kernel in rawhide (f15) : crash
2011/1/25 cornel panceac cpanc...@gmail.com 2011/1/25 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 20:21 +0200, cornel panceac wrote: maybe it's been reported already, but here both f15 kernels crash at boot. f14 works fine. This is obviously highly hardware dependent, so your report isn't much use as is. =) The kernel boots on other hardware (like mine). So it'd be good to have more details of the crash, your hardware info, and a test with a 2.6.37 kernel build (I suspect this is likely a 2.6.38 regression). And you should probably file it, at redhat or upstream bugzilla. probably the smolt profile (from f14) will be someday available here: http://www.smolts.org/client/show/pub_6da62aa6-7873-4da2-8803-4e5e6a3c5ff9 right now, the site is in guru_meditation state :) while the crash info was displayed, i've seen some mentions of plymouthd. video card is $ lspci -nn | grep -i vga 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation G73 [GeForce 7300 GT] [10de:0393] (rev a1) i'll try disabling the plymouthd service (if there is such thing) and report back. yes, the process that crashes the kernel seems to be plymouthd. any know way to prevent plymouthd from starting? removing rhgb quiet didn't help. also, once, i've seen something familiar: /proc/device-tree: can't find root, like in the good old days, when fedora was unable to figure out which of my three hard drives is first ... but that's another story. -- The beginning is the most important part of the work. -- *Plato* -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
