Re: Can Fedora move away from blue backgrounds?
I can't comment on the health issues, but TBH I usually dump the default wallpaper for a forest scene of some kind within an hour of installing Linux ;-) On Sat, Sep 22, 2018, 16:43 Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:45:28AM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > The evidence is finally in on how blue light destroys the retina. > > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28254-8 > > (Nature only publishes peer reviewed material.) > > I'm... not really qualified to understand this, so I asked a friend who is, > and she says: > > "The item that stood out for me was “40–100 mW 445, 488, 515, and 594 nm >solid-state lasers equipped with Andor® FRAP-PA (fluorescence recovery > after >photobleaching and photoactivation) unit in real time”... are you using > a >40-100mW focused laser? That doesn’t seem likely. You’re probably fine." > > > -- > Matthew Miller > > Fedora Project Leader > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Nvidia and Fedora current state
On 9/22/18 4:51 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 11:28:36 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: Rebooted a few times, and suddenly the symptoms are gone again. It's like something doesn't initialize correctly when it happens. Are you using Wayland or Xorg? Currently Wayland and Nouveau driver, which are the default. Try switching to Xorg instead and see if that makes a difference. You can edit the /etc/gdm/custom.conf to disable Wayland. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F29 Gnome Install process - A pain
This will probably be considered a "minor" pain. And, since I don't use GNOME except in a VM for testing, I guess it is. I'd just like to go on record to say I dislike a few things about the install process. 1. There is no option to set the hostname during install. 2. User creation is delayed until first boot and at the time of creation there is no option to specify the UID and GID. So, if you're like me, and use existing NFS services and your primary user doesn't have 1000/1000 for them you have to either know to create an initial throw away account or manually make changes later. -- Cardinal Rule of Presentations: "Tell them what you are going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them." signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Can Fedora move away from blue backgrounds?
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:45:28AM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > The evidence is finally in on how blue light destroys the retina. > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28254-8 > (Nature only publishes peer reviewed material.) I'm... not really qualified to understand this, so I asked a friend who is, and she says: "The item that stood out for me was “40–100 mW 445, 488, 515, and 594 nm solid-state lasers equipped with Andor® FRAP-PA (fluorescence recovery after photobleaching and photoactivation) unit in real time”... are you using a 40-100mW focused laser? That doesn’t seem likely. You’re probably fine." -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 29-20180922.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 5/132 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) ID: 284364 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284364 ID: 284380 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284380 ID: 284386 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284386 ID: 284420 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284420 ID: 284427 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284427 ID: 284443 Test: x86_64 universal install_software_raid URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284443 Soft failed openQA tests: 3/132 (x86_64), 2/24 (i386) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) ID: 284322 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284322 ID: 284323 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284323 ID: 284348 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284348 ID: 284349 Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284349 ID: 284355 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/284355 Passed openQA tests: 123/132 (x86_64), 22/24 (i386) Skipped openQA tests: 1 of 158 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: runaway packagekitd process, was F29 Beta 1.5 problem
On 9/22/18 12:32 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 7:49 AM pmkel...@frontier.com wrote: I decided to go ahead to try doing some testing. The runaway mode was still running when I started testing things. First I did the desktop browser tests and they passed. Then I did the desktop terminal tests and they also passed. Then I ran the desktop update graphical tests using the Software application. The application started fine and I could get to the Updates screen okay, but when I clicked the Refresh button, after a few seconds I got a gray colored pop up that said it could not continue and a long list of errors. The pop up does not support Copy so I didn't capture the details. I closed the Software application and tried to reopen it. The window came up but the usual graphics and text was not present. I restarted the PC to get out of the runaway mode and then I was able to run the update graphical test to completion and it passed. It seems that this gnome-software runaway mode does more than just use up cycles. I am discontinuing testing. Please let me know if there is something more you want me to do / try. I see a lot of these in your journal: Sep 22 10:03:40 f29h.local packagekitd[1104]: g_object_ref: assertion 'G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed I see them in mine as well, no idea if they're related to the runaway process. What I'm seeing is packagekit using about 9% CPU when it's downloading metadata (refreshing repo and app info); and using a more than 100% CPU when it's downloading files. So I filed this: g_object_ref spewing in journal bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1631968 It's probably a gtk thing but I've set the component to packagekit since it's the one doing the spewing. Also, you can disable the background downloading of updated packages by packagekit with: $ gsettings set org.gnome.software download-updates false This is a per user setting. You still get metadata refresh, you can still use Gnome Software to install/remove and update applications, it just won't download any packages in the background, and so you also won't get any notifications for updates. You can either use Gnome Software or dnf to manually apply updates. Thanks for filing the bug. I wasn't sure of what was going on. I'm not really familiar with the functions of packagekit. There is also the fact that the journal command Adam asked me to use was (sudo journalctl -b -u packagekit); so I guess I would expect most of the entries to be for packagekit. I am familiar with that setting. there is also: gsettings set org.gnome.software allow-updates false That one will stop retrieval of the meta data. I use them both on my "in use machines" because I always use dnf to get updates with (dnf upgrade --refresh). I left this Beta RC1.5 on my test machine in its as installed state since I intended to run the QA test cases on it. According to the gnome system monitor application, it's gnome-software that's taking up all the cycles. gnome-software is another mystery to me. From the name it sounds like a library of functions common to lots of gnome applications. As you saw in the note I posted that you responded to, I started doing some tests. Testing ran into a problem with the graphical updates test, but after a Restart to stop the runaway. I got Software to run the Refresh and the updates were installed. curiously, since then, the runaway has not started again. I'm going to leave it over night to see what happens. I just ran (dnf history info). Lots and lots of things, but notably, from my limited experience: kernel 4.18.9, gjs, glibc, gemu, curl, libcurl, and ostree. Is there some thing(s) I should check the history list for just in case tomorrow morning the runaway has not come back and perhaps make an estimate as to what the problem source was? Thanks again for helping and Have a Great Evening! Pat (Tablepc) ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria
On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 11:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 11:30 AM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > Yes, frankly. Not a lot of testers even keep a DVD-RW drive and media > > around any more. It takes like a half hour just to write all the media > > for testing, then another few hours to run complete installs from them > > all (since optical media are *slow*). > > > > If it's not burdensome, why does no-one except the paid RH folks ever > > seem to run the test? And usually at the last minute, at that? > > > > I've had to buy three DVD-RW drives *solely for the purpose of being > > able to test this* (they keep dying, the things aren't terribly > > reliable). And I keep a spindle of media around, again, solely for the > > purpose of testing this, I don't use them for anything else. (In fact > > I've nearly run out, so if we keep this criteria, I'm gonna have to go > > out and blow some money on some more media I won't ever use for > > anything but testing this). > > This kind of disproportionate shift of a criterion's burden is > inappropriate. It also sticks in my craw when bugs like this are > discovered late. > > In theory if you test the released beta, and a nightly early on in > freeze, there shouldn't be a regression in the final release that'd > cause only optical boot failures. In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice...:P -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Nvidia and Fedora current state
I don't think the `nouveau` kernel module is a viable option on newer NVidia cards. I have a laptop with a 1050Ti and nouveau flat out doesn't work - it either black screens or freezes at some random point after showing the display. This is cross-distro; I have the same problem with Ubuntu Bionic, Antergos and Fedora 29 Live beta 1.5. I filed a bug in Bugzilla last night (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1631934) but this is most likely upstream. On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 11:28:36 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > >> > Rebooted a few times, and suddenly the symptoms are gone again. >> > It's like something doesn't initialize correctly when it happens. > >> Are you using Wayland or Xorg? > > Currently Wayland and Nouveau driver, which are the default. > > When it occurs, on the GDM screen the lag is noticable already. It doesn't > make sense to log in then. The mouse pointer doesn't move cleanly. Logging > in suffers from delays. And then it becomes worse and worse. One can barely > move the mouse anymore to use GUI elements. It takes two seconds for windows > to open. Denial of service. As if something throttles graphics operations > due to not setting up the hardware properly. > > When it doesn't occur, everything is fine already at the GDM screen. > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Mastering DFS Analytics https://leanpub.com/masteringdfsanalytics Markovs of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains! ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: runaway packagekitd process, was F29 Beta 1.5 problem
On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 10:32 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 7:49 AM pmkel...@frontier.com > wrote: > > > I decided to go ahead to try doing some testing. The runaway mode was > > still running when I started testing things. First I did the desktop > > browser tests and they passed. Then I did the desktop terminal tests and > > they also passed. Then I ran the desktop update graphical tests using > > the Software application. The application started fine and I could get > > to the Updates screen okay, but when I clicked the Refresh button, after > > a few seconds I got a gray colored pop up that said it could not > > continue and a long list of errors. The pop up does not support Copy so > > I didn't capture the details. I closed the Software application and > > tried to reopen it. The window came up but the usual graphics and text > > was not present. I restarted the PC to get out of the runaway mode and > > then I was able to run the update graphical test to completion and it > > passed. > > > > It seems that this gnome-software runaway mode does more than just use > > up cycles. I am discontinuing testing. Please let me know if there is > > something more you want me to do / try. > > I see a lot of these in your journal: > > Sep 22 10:03:40 f29h.local packagekitd[1104]: g_object_ref: assertion > 'G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed > > I see them in mine as well, no idea if they're related to the runaway > process. What I'm seeing is packagekit using about 9% CPU when it's > downloading metadata (refreshing repo and app info); and using a more > than 100% CPU when it's downloading files. > > So I filed this: > g_object_ref spewing in journal bug > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1631968 Thanks for that. I found what looks like a fix for it upstream, and also noticed quite a lot of other bugfix commits ahead of the current Fedora build, so I've backported a bunch of those and am running a new PackageKit build now: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29813351 once that's done I'll submit an update. Please give that updated PackageKit a shot and see if it behaves better. Thanks! (CCing hughsie to let him know what I did) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F29: power notification on gnome lock screen, no journal messages
Crossposting test@ desktop@ Hi, I keep getting this weird behavior on Fedora 29 for which there are no journal messages at all. This is the setup: 1. on battery power 2. Settings>Power>Blank Power = 5 minutes 3. Settings>Power>Dim Screen when inactive = On 4. Settings>Power>Automatic Suspend>Battery = On, 15 minutes --- 5. Use is inactive for more than 5 minutes, and less than 15. (At 15 minutes it definitely goes into suspend successfully). 6. I look up and see the GNOME lock screen with multiple yakyak notifications, and also see a power notification (international stop sign symbol). The power notification doesn't itself make the display come on, it's yakyak. If I don't receive an incoming message on yakyak, I have no idea the power notification is present. And if I take a screenshot while the display is off, the screenshot file is all black. 7. The instant I click on any key or the trackpad, only the power notification vanishes. The yakyak message remain in the list, and once I log back into my user session, the power notification is not in the drop down list of notifications when clicking on the time. And yet all the yakyak notifications are in the list. 8. Nothing in the journal related to power https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/p1Y-B8Sq3446sM4H5FtvgQ/raw Is there a way to make the environment spit out more verbose messages into the journal? I don't see a debug or verbose option with gnome-shell -h gnome-shell-3.30.0-7.fc29.x86_64 -- Chris Murphy ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: runaway packagekitd process, was F29 Beta 1.5 problem
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 7:49 AM pmkel...@frontier.com wrote: > I decided to go ahead to try doing some testing. The runaway mode was > still running when I started testing things. First I did the desktop > browser tests and they passed. Then I did the desktop terminal tests and > they also passed. Then I ran the desktop update graphical tests using > the Software application. The application started fine and I could get > to the Updates screen okay, but when I clicked the Refresh button, after > a few seconds I got a gray colored pop up that said it could not > continue and a long list of errors. The pop up does not support Copy so > I didn't capture the details. I closed the Software application and > tried to reopen it. The window came up but the usual graphics and text > was not present. I restarted the PC to get out of the runaway mode and > then I was able to run the update graphical test to completion and it > passed. > > It seems that this gnome-software runaway mode does more than just use > up cycles. I am discontinuing testing. Please let me know if there is > something more you want me to do / try. I see a lot of these in your journal: Sep 22 10:03:40 f29h.local packagekitd[1104]: g_object_ref: assertion 'G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed I see them in mine as well, no idea if they're related to the runaway process. What I'm seeing is packagekit using about 9% CPU when it's downloading metadata (refreshing repo and app info); and using a more than 100% CPU when it's downloading files. So I filed this: g_object_ref spewing in journal bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1631968 It's probably a gtk thing but I've set the component to packagekit since it's the one doing the spewing. Also, you can disable the background downloading of updated packages by packagekit with: $ gsettings set org.gnome.software download-updates false This is a per user setting. You still get metadata refresh, you can still use Gnome Software to install/remove and update applications, it just won't download any packages in the background, and so you also won't get any notifications for updates. You can either use Gnome Software or dnf to manually apply updates. -- Chris Murphy ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
IceCat 60.2.0
Hello everyone. IceCat is updated to the (pre) release 60.2.0 (Firefox 60.2.0 ESR). Because this package has been deeply changed, i wish that someone tests it before pushing a first 60.x to stable repositories. IceCat 60.2.0 updates is currently ready for testing on fedora 28+ https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5672a3e96d https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f1db97c32b Regards. -- --- Antonio Trande Fedora Project mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org' GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 11:30 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > Yes, frankly. Not a lot of testers even keep a DVD-RW drive and media > around any more. It takes like a half hour just to write all the media > for testing, then another few hours to run complete installs from them > all (since optical media are *slow*). > > If it's not burdensome, why does no-one except the paid RH folks ever > seem to run the test? And usually at the last minute, at that? > > I've had to buy three DVD-RW drives *solely for the purpose of being > able to test this* (they keep dying, the things aren't terribly > reliable). And I keep a spindle of media around, again, solely for the > purpose of testing this, I don't use them for anything else. (In fact > I've nearly run out, so if we keep this criteria, I'm gonna have to go > out and blow some money on some more media I won't ever use for > anything but testing this). This kind of disproportionate shift of a criterion's burden is inappropriate. It also sticks in my craw when bugs like this are discovered late. In theory if you test the released beta, and a nightly early on in freeze, there shouldn't be a regression in the final release that'd cause only optical boot failures. I'm a +1 to entirely dropping the criterion. -- Chris Murphy ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Nvidia and Fedora current state
On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 11:28:36 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > Rebooted a few times, and suddenly the symptoms are gone again. > > It's like something doesn't initialize correctly when it happens. > Are you using Wayland or Xorg? Currently Wayland and Nouveau driver, which are the default. When it occurs, on the GDM screen the lag is noticable already. It doesn't make sense to log in then. The mouse pointer doesn't move cleanly. Logging in suffers from delays. And then it becomes worse and worse. One can barely move the mouse anymore to use GUI elements. It takes two seconds for windows to open. Denial of service. As if something throttles graphics operations due to not setting up the hardware properly. When it doesn't occur, everything is fine already at the GDM screen. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F29-beta - Policykit Agent error VNC access to Xfce DE
On 9/22/18 3:01 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > I can't get vncserver started on my F28-arm image: I never really looked into why, but the "fix" is to comment out the PID entry in the vncserver.service entry. -- Cardinal Rule of Presentations: "Tell them what you are going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them." signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
