On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:41:44 -0500 Jon Masters wrote:
I also suggest /considering/ implementing rolling updates rather than
pushing everything to stable. By rolling updates, in this case I mean
implementing a technical means (and this is tricky with mirrors) by
which not every user will
Matthew Garrett píše v Po 08. 03. 2010 v 21:59 +:
This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco
meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions
regarding whether updates in stable releases should be expected to
provide features or purely
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Sven Lankes s...@lank.es wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Before being added to updates, the package must receive a net karma of
+3 in Bodhi.
[...]
It is the expectation of Fesco that the majority of updates should
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 00:53, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 18:45 -0500, Steven M. Parrish wrote:
As a maintainer I have seen several of my packages sit in updates testing for
over 2 weeks with no comments and no karma. In fact they sat so long I got
nag mail
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
It is the expectation of Fesco that the majority of updates should
easily be able to garner the necessary karma in a minimal space of time.
This seems naive to me. My experience is that there are few people
willing to provide
On 03/09/2010 05:45 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/09/2010 06:37 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but right now the Fedora project knows little
to nothing about its user base as a whole from a scientific perspective.
And why does Fedora need to know about this?
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 16:10:40 -0700, Kevin wrote:
- Proposed Updates Policy Change - mjg59
So, I'm willing to sacrifice a pawn. If that proposal, in particular the
| Before being added to updates, the package
| must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
part and/or a minimum 14 days halt in
2010/3/9 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 16:10:40 -0700, Kevin wrote:
- Proposed Updates Policy Change - mjg59
So, I'm willing to sacrifice a pawn. If that proposal, in particular the
| Before being added to updates, the package
| must receive a net karma of +3 in
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:51:06AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer market.
3. one group wants us to aim
Event: Fedora Bug Triage Meeting
Date: 2010-03-09
Time: 15:00 UTC
Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
Additions or corrections to the agenda? Reply to this email.
= Agenda =
* follow ups from last meeting
* your item here! (let us know before the meeting)
* open floor
Please do
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv25752/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
import.log perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Import of perl-Net-STOMP-Client.
---
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Net-STOMP-Client:
94b6b61ac64c91be844aa94efe1c9247 Net-STOMP-Client-0.8.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:51:06AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31470/F-11
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Populate branches.
--- NEW FILE perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31470/EL-5
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Populate branches.
--- NEW FILE perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/F-13
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31470/F-13
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Populate branches.
--- NEW FILE perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563935
Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/2010 05:21 PM, Till Maas wrote:
Good news everyone,
you can probably expect to receive more positive bodhi karma for your
updates in the future (or you already got unexpected much), because
there is now a script called
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 11:11:30AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 16:10:40 -0700, Kevin wrote:
- Proposed Updates Policy Change - mjg59
So, I'm willing to sacrifice a pawn. If that proposal, in particular the
| Before being added to updates, the package
| must
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 06:05:32 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
Folks,
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
My proposal is that we create a Fedora User Survey and create a link
on the fp.o website with a few very simple questions.
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 13:55:53 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Karel Zak wrote:
Always when I see that someone is trying to introduce a new rule I
have to ask myself ... why so large project like kernel is able to
successfully exist for 20 years without a huge collection of rules?
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:51, Joe Orton jor...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
It is the expectation of Fesco that the majority of updates should
easily be able to garner the necessary karma in a minimal space of time.
This seems naive to me.
Sounds pretty sensible.
We should also keep in mind that one size does not fit all. While core
and widely used packages should have a more conservative update path,
some packages could benefit from faster release. karma mechanism +
feedback integration in PK looks like a total win for the latter.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563937
Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding
Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 07:50 -0500 schrieb Stephen Gallagher:
On 03/06/2010 05:21 PM, Till Maas wrote:
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Easy_Karma
Given the obvious utility of this script, can we get it added to the
fedora-packager package? It doesn't make a lot of sense to
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 03/08/2010 11:05 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
-1
It sure looks like a californian referendum process. Let me make this
abundantly clear: I have ZERO interest in developing a distro which is
driven by mob vote of whomever happens to be on the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/08/2010 10:59 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
- -1, I would
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
We get the users we aim for.
Not really true. We don't aim at all, and we only get the users that can
bear to stay with us...
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that could be
fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature incomplete stuff in
history...
Nobody can't say I'm for shipping broken stuff - for release, updates etc...
I'm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563937
Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:20:20 +0100, Mathieu wrote:
I maintain some niche packages that almost no one uses/no one would
provide karma for. But if I'm asked for a bugfix, and I do it, I want
the people requesting it to tell me that it indeed fixes the issue and
doesn't break anything else.
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 8:38:44 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
I'm sure with the same logic I can say a lot of things.
What I said was I want fewer broken things.
-sv
Seth,
The problem is that
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Seth,
The problem is that when things do get broken in a stable release, the
updates that fix the problem often only get released in the next
release.
When I installed F11, two of my systems ran fine for the install and
those updates
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:37:26 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 12:23 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user
and
what they want. Now someone wants to know who are our users/what our users
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that sane. I have a dual boot XP +
Ubuntu machine that I do some play with,
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that sane. I have a dual boot
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Karel Zak wrote:
Always when I see that someone is trying to introduce a new rule I
have to ask myself ... why so large project like kernel is able to
successfully exist for 20 years without a huge collection of rules?
the kernel has one rule which ends up working very
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:17:21AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Aiming at #1 means that every single new student and researcher at the
school where I work comes in asking for Ubuntu -- even if one could make a
very persuasive case that these users probably fit better into #2 and #3.
I think the
The Fedora 13 Goddard Alpha release is available! What's next for the
free operating system that shows off the best new technology of
tomorrow? You can see the future now at:
http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease?anF13a
== What is the Alpha release? ==
The Alpha release contains all the
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:35:49 Dan Horák wrote:
Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who
are
On Monday, 08 March 2010 at 22:59, Matthew Garrett wrote:
[...]
Proposal
The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
-1 to this. I've
Till Maas said the following on 03/05/2010 04:27 AM Pacific Time:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:53:54PM -0500, TK009 wrote:
I hope everyone is well. With the worst of the “snowpocalypse behind us
(here in the Northern Hemisphere) and the branching of Fedora 13, there
is a bit of ‘spring
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/EL-4
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31470/EL-4
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Populate branches.
--- NEW FILE perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
our user
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:52:28AM +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
Matthew Garrett píše v Po 08. 03. 2010 v 21:59 +:
This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco
meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions
regarding whether updates in stable
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567120
--- Comment #6 from Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt 2010-03-09 10:23:00
EST ---
Would be possible to have version 1.23
Author: spot
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Set-Scalar/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4662
Modified Files:
perl-Set-Scalar.spec sources
Log Message:
sync to current
Index: perl-Set-Scalar.spec
On 03/09/2010 03:29 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
I don't see how we expect that for all packages to get
Dne 8.3.2010 22:59, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
I usually decrease required karma to +-1, but I have never
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563935
--- Comment #2 from Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org 2010-03-09 07:27:53
EST ---
Steven, it's been almost one month already
Today I wanted to give F13 Alpha a test and installed it. The
installation went fine but I do not get a proper screen resolution
setup. The basic setup was done via system-config-display, I only added
a modeline. But it seems to me that the modeline is ignored. Is this a
new behavior because of
Compose started at Tue Mar 9 08:15:08 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires libxerces-c.so.28
calibre-0.6.42-1.fc14.i686 requires libMagickCore.so.2
calibre-0.6.42-1.fc14.i686 requires
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:30:37PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
I personally thought the old 12 month RedHat Linux release cycle was about
right.
RHL was also on a 6 month release cycle.
--
Matt Domsch
Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO
linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux
--
devel
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:00:20PM -0800, Chris Weyl wrote:
Hmm. So. I have a package, perl-Moose, that has 4,667 tests run at
build time. It depends on perl-Class-MOP, which has 2,225 tests, and
it in turn depends on perl, which has 234,776 tests run at build. On
a future note, we're
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco
meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions
regarding whether updates in stable releases should be expected to
provide features or
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 15:43 +0100, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
Today I wanted to give F13 Alpha a test and installed it. The
installation went fine but I do not get a proper screen resolution
setup. The basic setup was done via system-config-display, I only added
a modeline. But it
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
our user and what they want. Now someone wants to
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Set-Scalar:
749349bb42757f46d25593e89444872e Set-Scalar-1.25.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user
and
what they want. Now someone
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:17:01AM -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
4. one group who don't really care about distro wars but use Fedora
because this way they know what will be in RHEL/CentOS, which is what
they use for serious work on their servers.
I actually use RHEL on my servers because
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 21:59 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
This is the policy that I expect to be discussed during the Fesco
meeting tomorrow. This is entirely orthogonal to the ongoing discussions
regarding whether updates in stable releases should be expected to
provide features or purely
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 02:10:58PM +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 13:55:53 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Karel Zak wrote:
Always when I see that someone is trying to introduce a new rule I
have to ask myself ... why so large project like kernel is able to
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:23:42 +0100, Jaroslav wrote:
Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users,
Not sure this is true.
we don't know who are our user and
what they want.
Really? The users I see want stuff that works. Preferably, they want the
stuff to
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user and
what they want. Now someone wants to know who are our users/what our users
really want, we
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:26:15PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
-1 to this. I've packaged a number of things that I know just one user of.
I have no idea how many people actually use my packages or how to reach
them. Therefore it will most likely be impossible for me to get +3
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:51:06 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that
could be fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature
incomplete stuff in history...
Nobody can't say I'm for
Author: spot
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Set-Scalar/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7398/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Set-Scalar.spec sources
Log Message:
update to 1.25
Index: .cvsignore
Author: spot
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Set-Scalar/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7398/EL-5
Modified Files:
perl-Set-Scalar.spec sources
Log Message:
update to 1.25
Index: perl-Set-Scalar.spec
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:12:11PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:21:45PM +0100, Sven Lankes wrote:
If Fesco is aiming at getting rid of all the pesky packagers maintaining low
profile packages: You're well on your way.
So, no, that's not the intent and it's
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 02:20:20PM +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:51, Joe Orton jor...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
It is the expectation of Fesco that the majority of updates should
easily be able to garner the
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer
Author: stevetraylen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-STOMP-Client/F-12
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31470/F-12
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
Log Message:
Populate branches.
--- NEW FILE perl-Net-STOMP-Client.spec
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 15:57:05 Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
We get the users we aim for.
Not really true. We don't aim at all, and we only get the users that can
bear to stay with us...
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 07:45 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 15:43 +0100, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
I'm wondering because before F10 was installed, and I even did not need
to setup a modeline. Everything was automatically configured by X.org.
If your monitor is
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567120
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-03-09
11:12:17 EST ---
perl-Set-Scalar-1.25-1.el5 has
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:26:15PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
-1 to this. I've packaged a number of things that I know just one user of.
I have no idea how many people actually use my packages or how to reach
them. Therefore it
- Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:44:18AM -0500, Michal Nowak wrote:
So far when rebuilding Base group: TOTAL: 99 PASS: 84 FAIL: 15
See attachment for complete list. Regarding fails, they are being
classified by the script so you can easily figure out,
Author: spot
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Set-Scalar/F-13
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11905
Modified Files:
perl-Set-Scalar.spec sources
Log Message:
update to 1.25
Index: perl-Set-Scalar.spec
On 09/03/10 15:49, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:30:37PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
I personally thought the old 12 month RedHat Linux release cycle was about
right.
RHL was also on a 6 month release cycle.
Shows how good my memory is :)
Mind you, even then, I only update my
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567120
--- Comment #8 from Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt 2010-03-09 11:29:19
EST ---
Spot,
Thanks!
jpo
--
Configure
- Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 March 2010 11:44, Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com wrote:
Past months I spent investigating `gold' - the new GNU linker
and how it now works with stock Fedora packages.
Using gold, I get:
/usr/bin/ld: --no-add-needed: unknown option
On 09/03/10 15:26, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Seth Vidalskvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE
(2010?03?08? 19:54), Rich Megginson wrote:
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
ack.
--noriko
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:24:29AM -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com writes:
Past months I spent investigating `gold' - the new GNU linker
and how it now works with stock Fedora packages.
[...]
Do your
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:41:15PM +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
roadmap/timeline to removing hal dependencies from kde?
* udisk is not suitable replacement for hal
* upstream is working on new solid for 4.5/4.6
* ltinkl to document a list of udisk missing features, that block
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Karel Zak wrote:
It's not (only) about Linus. It's about working environment and
strong focus on technical things.
Please, read:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/ManagementStyle
Yes,
Hello Ewan,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 11:50:21 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and
- Roland McGrath rol...@redhat.com wrote:
Nice hack, Michal! As you are aware, I have been slowly preparing
things
to get towards the option of using gold for real in the future.
Making
this sort of testing easy is about the next thing I thought someone
should
do (and wasn't going
Orphaning couple of packages:
- JSDoc (upstream has moved to competing project
http://code.google.com/p/jsdoc-toolkit/, so unless somebody needs this
package, I think it is ready for retiring from Fedora completely)
- python-urllib2_kerberos -- unsuccessful attempt to use this, lost any
Jesse Keating wrote:
Slight variation on this. All builds from devel/ (or master in the new
git world) would go to the koji tag dist-rawhide-candidate. Builds
which are tagged with dist-rawhide-candidate trigger AutoQA tests, of
the nature rawhide acceptance (this would have to get fleshed
Will Woods wrote:
So the only unknown is: exactly what percentage of our *current* users
are willing to accept a loss of stability in favor of New Hotness? But
I'm fairly certain this question is *irrelevant*. Our current users'
expectations are already set by their past experience with
Hello,
I have been (together with the QA team) working on a 'Package
update policy' proposal. Because Matthew Garrett yesterday
presented his own proposal regarding this topic, we decided
to also present our proposal, albeit still unfinished.
The proposal is here:
Mail Lists wrote:
Yes we've had bad decisions (kde 4.0 in my view)
It shall be noted that KDE 4.0 was NOT an update (we did NOT push it to F8
for obvious reasons) and that the updates actually brought it up to 4.1 and
later 4.2.
Now I'm not convinced shipping 4.0 was a mistake in the first
Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
Even if it already went to testing and sit there for ages? This will lead to
MANY
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
you have been on websites that allow anonymous posting, right? You know
what happens to them?
Yes, anonymous polling is liking playing with fire. Let me throw this
out there -- for a *first* run -- you could only allow FAS
Matthew Garrett wrote:
What guards you against changes in the buildroot, non-deterministic
compiler bugs, cosmic rays and the like? The point is to test the
binaries that are being pushed into the hands of the users.
There's a point at which the probability of breakage is so low that it's a
1 - 100 of 196 matches
Mail list logo
