Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Matěj Cepl
Dne 12.3.2010 02:26, Mike Chambers napsal(a): > On F13, upgrade gnome-panel to version in updates-testing and you'll get When was F13 released? Oh, it wasn't, so it is just glorified Rawhide still? And you complain about it being broken (especially in its updates-*testing*)? BTW, this is the re

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Matěj Cepl
Dne 12.3.2010 02:24, Rahul Sundaram napsal(a): > I disagree. Imagining that we are living in a island where no software > exists outside the repository is just delusional and the assumption that > everyone has the bandwidth to deal with all that churn is wrong as > well. I should make people sit

Re: Meeting summary/minutes for 2010-03-09 FESCo meeting

2010-03-11 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:55:18 -0600, Dennis wrote: > I was referring to things like > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-June/msg00120.html > > Where rather than work with fedora as you previously had you chose to be less > involved. which is perfectly fine and ok. Aha.

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Chris Adams wrote: > There's a difference between not supporting third-party software (is > that actually documented somewhere or another Kevin Kofler rule?) and > intentionally breaking it. There's no policy saying we support it, ergo by default, we don't. And we don't intentionally break it, we

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Matthew Garrett wrote: > If the software is not maintained within Fedora, there's no notification > of soname bumps. There is, soname bumps are supposed to be announced on this public list. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:15:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > You don't see a problem with breaking someone's application just because > > they've installed an update to a stable release of Fedora? It's > > obviously fine to do so when upgrading between releases, but wi

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Paul Wouters
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Paul Wouters wrote: >> Is ARPA expecting everyone to upgrade to a sha256 supporting bind >> immediately? There's no migration window? > > If someone has dnssec enabled in bind including DLV, then the key will be > found and its use will be attempted. I am not sure what happens

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Ewan Mac Mahon
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:59:46PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:56:05 -0500 > Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > > (And if the answer is "backport the security fixes to 1.8.1" then I'm > > afraid I don't really have the skills nor have the time to spend on > > such massive effor

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Rahul Sundaram
On 03/12/2010 06:52 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> If you don't even agree with a basic principle that breaking ABI should be >> avoided in updates, we don't really have much left to discuss. >> > I don't see this as being a "basic principle" at all. For an enterprise

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: > I don't see this as being a "basic principle" at all. For an enterprise > distro like RHEL or CentOS, sure. But not for something like Fedora. What > counts is that all software in Fedora depending on the library gets rebuilt > and pushed at the same time.

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Mike Chambers
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 23:41 +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > You don't see a problem with breaking someone's application just because > they've installed an update to a stable release of Fedora? It's > obviously fine to do so when upgrading between releases, but within a > release it's just grat

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Mathieu Bridon wrote: > « Alright, today I'll be implementing feature XYZ in my Foobar program. » > > [... a short hack later, testing the change...] > > « Why doesn't it work? It was working fine last time I tried, what's > happening » > > [... an hour of debugging later...] > > « $...@!%µ the

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Rahul Sundaram wrote: > If you don't even agree with a basic principle that breaking ABI should be > avoided in updates, we don't really have much left to discuss. I don't see this as being a "basic principle" at all. For an enterprise distro like RHEL or CentOS, sure. But not for something like

Re: Gnome panel

2010-03-11 Thread Mike Chambers
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 15:20 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 17:10 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: > > Anyone having any issues with the latest gnome-panel update that has > > come out in last day or two? As in, when trying to log out the panel > > just crashes and resets itself?

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Mathieu Bridon
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:44, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> On 03/12/2010 05:44 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> Chris Adams wrote: >>> What about somebody developing on their own computer?  Having to rebuild because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a dedica

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Peter Hutterer
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:26:26AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Chris Adams wrote: > > Developers can't always get what they want. Just because Fedora updates > > to upstream's release-of-the-day doesn't mean Ubuntu, SuSE, etc. have > > updated (so hopefully upstream is still paying attention to o

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Rahul Sundaram
On 03/12/2010 06:14 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > How is it disruptive? Surely not because I have to rebuild the stuff I am > developing myself and have to compile very often anyway > Just because you are in a position to rebuild stuff when necessary, does not mean that is convenient for all con

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Simo Sorce wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:14:36 +0100 > Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Chris Adams wrote: >> > What about somebody developing on their own computer? Having to >> > rebuild because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a >> > dedicated admin) loaded an update is highly irrit

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/12/2010 05:44 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Chris Adams wrote: >> >>> What about somebody developing on their own computer? Having to rebuild >>> because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a dedicated >>> admin) loaded an update is highly irritating. >>>

Re: QA's Package update policy proposal

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Al Dunsmuir wrote: > Often the reason that folks are using an older stable release because > they *can not* update to the new stable release because it doesn't > work for them, But that's exactly why we want to continue pushing those updates that do work for them. :-) > or they *choose*

Re: To semi-rolling or not to semi-rolling, that is the question...

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Doug Ledford wrote: > You're assuming that each "flag day" will in fact be one where the user > has to do something. That's not necessarily true. The hda->sda switch > happened, what, 2 years or more ago? Yeah, it was a big deal. We've > not really had an event like that since, and don't curren

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Chris Adams wrote: > Developers can't always get what they want. Just because Fedora updates > to upstream's release-of-the-day doesn't mean Ubuntu, SuSE, etc. have > updated (so hopefully upstream is still paying attention to older > releases). It is (especially for leaf packages) much more like

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Simo Sorce
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:14:36 +0100 Kevin Kofler wrote: > Chris Adams wrote: > > What about somebody developing on their own computer? Having to > > rebuild because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a > > dedicated admin) loaded an update is highly irritating. > > Huh? I have to co

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: >> The average is 3 months which is just as unreasonable. > > Why? What do you consider a reasonable interval? The time it actually takes to test the update. I.e. at most 3 weeks. >> > For example (just an example - please don't take t

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Rahul Sundaram
On 03/12/2010 05:44 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Chris Adams wrote: > >> What about somebody developing on their own computer? Having to rebuild >> because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a dedicated >> admin) loaded an update is highly irritating. >> > Huh? I have to compile

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Matthew Garrett wrote: > You don't see a problem with breaking someone's application just because > they've installed an update to a stable release of Fedora? It's > obviously fine to do so when upgrading between releases, but within a > release it's just gratuitously irritating. The application i

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Chris Adams wrote: > What about somebody developing on their own computer? Having to rebuild > because you (or possibly somebody else, if a system has a dedicated > admin) loaded an update is highly irritating. Huh? I have to compile the stuff I am developing very often anyway. Having to rebuild

Re: Meeting summary/minutes for 2010-03-09 FESCo meeting

2010-03-11 Thread Dennis Gilmore
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 04:41:07 pm Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:54:16 -0500, Bill wrote: > > 20:59:11 Kevin_Kofler: i dont see Michael Schwendt as > > infulencial. he choose to largely abstain from fedora years ago > > Huh? Now, what exactly is your problem with me? > What t

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: > Jesse Keating wrote: > > I had thought about these things, but they didn't strike me as a high > > level update type. And for the leaf node packages, when they do break > > it's not as less disruptive as you might think. Leaf node packages > > exist for a r

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:47:03PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > If a user has built an application against a library, it's not > > especially reasonable to then break that application by bumping a soname > > in a stable release. > > If the application is in Fedora as all

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: > Chris Adams wrote: > > Once upon a time, Paul Wouters said: > >> That might be harsh for some soname updates. Six months is a long time > >> to wait on new functionality after upstream released it. > > > > People keep tossing out "six months". How often is

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler said: > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > If a user has built an application against a library, it's not > > especially reasonable to then break that application by bumping a soname > > in a stable release. > > If the application is in Fedora as all applications eventually

Re: Gnome panel

2010-03-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 17:10 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: > Anyone having any issues with the latest gnome-panel update that has > come out in last day or two? As in, when trying to log out the panel > just crashes and resets itself? Went back to last gnome good panel but > that one has issues when

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Jesse Keating wrote: > I had thought about these things, but they didn't strike me as a high > level update type. And for the leaf node packages, when they do break > it's not as less disruptive as you might think. Leaf node packages > exist for a reason, they are likely very important to somebod

Gnome panel

2010-03-11 Thread Mike Chambers
Anyone having any issues with the latest gnome-panel update that has come out in last day or two? As in, when trying to log out the panel just crashes and resets itself? Went back to last gnome good panel but that one has issues when running with the rest of the gnome updates. -- Mike Chambers

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Jesse Keating
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 17:59 -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_Release_Updates_Proposal > > > > Here is the link. I'm going to start a new thread here. > > Thanks for drafting this. Would it make sense t

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Alexander Kahl wrote: > Please define "massive" if you're keeping exactly what's needed to keep > everything running and prune anything else by using a sophisticated, > tunable garbage collection mechanism. The whole point of the exercise was to do a lot of updates. But the more updates we do, th

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_Release_Updates_Proposal > > Here is the link.  I'm going to start a new thread here. Thanks for drafting this. Would it make sense to look at the API & coupling dimension? When a package provides an AP

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread psmith
On 11/03/10 22:45, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Chris Adams wrote: > > >> Once upon a time, Paul Wouters said: >> >>> That might be harsh for some soname updates. Six months is a long time >>> to wait on new functionality after upstream released it. >>> >> People keep tossing out "six m

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:52:06PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote: > >> That might be harsh for some soname updates. > > If a user has built an application against a library, it's not > especially reasonable to then break that application by bumping a soname > in a stable rel

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Paul Wouters said: >> That might be harsh for some soname updates. Six months is a long time >> to wait on new functionality after upstream released it. > > People keep tossing out "six months". How often is it that a new Fedora > release comes out right b

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Andrew McNabb
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:19:37AM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: > > Have you tried to buy a replacement PATA disk lately, particularly one no > larger than the 2^28 ATA-5 addressing limit? No. I haven't tried buying a replacement 386 lately, either. > The bother is that it looks like HD makers wi

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Przemek Klosowski
On 03/10/2010 07:54 AM, Alexander Kahl wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 03/10/2010 01:06 PM, Steven I Usdansky wrote: >> Instead of worrying about the occasional brokenness caused by an update to a >> stable release, how about focusing on a mechanism to easily recove

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread drago01
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Felix Miata wrote: > On 2010/03/11 12:10 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed: > >> You know you can buy a PCI SATA controller card for about $10 in any PC >> junk store, right? > > PC BIOS treat those as SCSI cards, which do not play nice with boot device > order

Re: Webcam test day - results deleted?

2010-03-11 Thread mike cloaked
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: >> Did you look at the history? That might give a clue if it was intentional or >> a mistake. >> > > It seems ok to me - > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-03-11_webcams > > Is that not the page you're looking at? > Yup - seems i

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Eric Sandeen
Alexander Boström wrote: > ons 2010-03-10 klockan 15:57 -0600 skrev Eric Sandeen: > >> There has been a lot of work upstream on 4k sector support, and in general >> yes, we are ready. > > Problems can probably be expected in case the drive does not report its > real block size to the software, th

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Alexander Boström
ons 2010-03-10 klockan 15:57 -0600 skrev Eric Sandeen: > There has been a lot of work upstream on 4k sector support, and in general > yes, we are ready. Problems can probably be expected in case the drive does not report its real block size to the software, though, like my WD15EARS (I think) or V

Re: Webcam test day - results deleted?

2010-03-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 21:43 +, mike cloaked wrote: > I was just about to enter some webcam test results but the results > that were there earlier seem to have disappeared! Is it just me or > has some clutz deleted the entries? Eyeballing the history: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?tit

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Toshio Kuratomi
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:35:55AM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said: > > Options: > > * Put a large admonition at the top that says "I am not a Packaging > > Guideline" and point to the packaging guideline page for user creation. > > * Remove the page > >

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Felix Miata
On 2010/03/11 12:10 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed: > You know you can buy a PCI SATA controller card for about $10 in any PC > junk store, right? PC BIOS treat those as SCSI cards, which do not play nice with boot device order control by the PC BIOS, if not OS device names. Even when neithe

Re: Webcam test day - results deleted?

2010-03-11 Thread Mike McGrath
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 21:43:24 +, > mike cloaked wrote: > > I was just about to enter some webcam test results but the results > > that were there earlier seem to have disappeared! Is it just me or > > has some clutz deleted the entries? > >

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Jesse Keating
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 16:22 -0500, Paul Wouters wrote: > On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > And it will be impossible for users running the non-sha256 bind to > > communicate with the sha256 supporting arpa? > > > > I guess I don't understand what do the users of the existing bind LOSE?

Re: Webcam test day - results deleted?

2010-03-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 21:43:24 +, mike cloaked wrote: > I was just about to enter some webcam test results but the results > that were there earlier seem to have disappeared! Is it just me or > has some clutz deleted the entries? Did you look at the history? That might give a clue if it

Webcam test day - results deleted?

2010-03-11 Thread mike cloaked
I was just about to enter some webcam test results but the results that were there earlier seem to have disappeared! Is it just me or has some clutz deleted the entries? -- mike c -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: To semi-rolling or not to semi-rolling, that is the question...

2010-03-11 Thread Doug Ledford
On 03/09/2010 07:46 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Doug Ledford wrote: >> Things like the libata kernel change and KDE 3 to 4 migration are >> intentional events > > That's the whole problem. Under our current model, we have places and times > where to perform those intentional disruptive changes, the

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Paul Wouters
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Seth Vidal wrote: > And it will be impossible for users running the non-sha256 bind to > communicate with the sha256 supporting arpa? > > I guess I don't understand what do the users of the existing bind LOSE? > > Is ARPA expecting everyone to upgrade to a sha256 supporting bi

Re: Example of karma not being functional [Was:POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl]

2010-03-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 16:35 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > This case is a nice example demonstrating several defects in "applying > karma votes for QA": > > > 1. The update package was sitting in "updates-testing" since 2010-02-22. > > > 2. It did receive +3 karma points before being pushed t

Re: Expect more positive bodhi karma / check karma automatism

2010-03-11 Thread Till Maas
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:22:35PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Additionally, I have some RFE's too. ;) > > - Could you add a 'q' for quit or something. Or at least not catch > control-c? If I am in the middle of doing something and need to > reboot or wander off, I would perfer to be able to

F-13 Branched report: 20100311 changes

2010-03-11 Thread Branched Report
Compose started at Thu Mar 11 09:15:07 UTC 2010 Broken deps for i386 -- doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1 easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5 edje-0.9.9.050-6.fc12.i68

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Simo Sorce
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:56:05 -0500 Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > (And if the answer is "backport the security fixes to 1.8.1" then I'm > afraid I don't really have the skills nor have the time to spend on > such massive effort). You can always find a co-maintainer skilled enough to help you in s

Note: comps moved to Fedora Hosted git

2010-03-11 Thread Bill Nottingham
As discussed both on-list, and at this week's FESCo meeting (http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-03-09/fesco.2010-03-09-20.00.txt) the 'comps' module used for mapping packages to package groups in Fedora has moved from CVS to Fedora Hosted git. You may view the module at:

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Jesse Keating
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 14:56 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Should there be a caveat for cases like I'm dealing with right now -- > pidgin-sipe 1.9.0 provides both security fixes and new features > compared to pidgin-sipe 1.8.1. > > If these guidelines are to be followed, then I both should (

Re: Expect more positive bodhi karma / check karma automatism

2010-03-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
Additionally, I have some RFE's too. ;) - Could you add a 'q' for quit or something. Or at least not catch control-c? If I am in the middle of doing something and need to reboot or wander off, I would perfer to be able to just stop. - Perhaps also a 'n' and 'p' for next and previous ? If I

Re: Expect more positive bodhi karma / check karma automatism

2010-03-11 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Till Maas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 04:51:34PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >> The biggest query command I would like at the moment is something like: >> >> fedora-easy-karma --list # lists packages to be voted on. >> fedora-easy-karma --list-new # l

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 00:19 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: > Have you tried to buy a replacement PATA disk lately, particularly one no > larger than the 2^28 ATA-5 addressing limit? Buying a replacement 20G HD, or > one compatible with it even if 10X or more the storage size actually needed, > has bec

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Konstantin Ryabitsev
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >> Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should be >> done.  Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in >> another round of discussions (not this meet

Re: Install fedora-easy-karma by default?

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/11/2010 11:00 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> >> I tried to send you a reply, but it bounced; gmail says the address you >> gave does not exist. >> > > I got the mail. Thanks. Yes, sorry. Must not have read the bounce close enough; I was trying to forward a copy to mys

Re: F13 -EGPUDRIVERNOWORKIE

2010-03-11 Thread Michał Piotrowski
W dniu 10 marca 2010 20:49 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski napisał: > I can install F13 in text mode later and send some more informations > about these issues with both drivers. Unfortunately I can't https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=572658 Regards, Michal -- devel mailing list devel@li

Re: Install fedora-easy-karma by default?

2010-03-11 Thread Rahul Sundaram
On 03/11/2010 11:00 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > I tried to send you a reply, but it bounced; gmail says the address you > gave does not exist. > I got the mail. Thanks. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Paul Wouters said: > That might be harsh for some soname updates. Six months is a long time > to wait on new functionality after upstream released it. People keep tossing out "six months". How often is it that a new Fedora release comes out right before a new upstream, and that

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:52:06PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote: > That might be harsh for some soname updates. If a user has built an application against a library, it's not especially reasonable to then break that application by bumping a soname in a stable release. -- Matthew Garrett | mj...@

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Seth Vidal
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Paul Wouters wrote: > > That might be harsh for some soname updates. Six months is a long time > to wait on new functionality after upstream released it. Even for users > running only full Fedora releases. Though I see various phrasing around > this that would allow exceptio

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Paul Wouters
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_Release_Updates_Proposal > > Here is the link. I'm going to start a new thread here. # Stable releases should not be used for tracking upstream version closely when this is likely to change the u

Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

2010-03-11 Thread Jesse Keating
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should be > done. Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in > another round of discussions (not this meeting). https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_Release_Updates

Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11

2010-03-11 Thread Matt Domsch
Forwarding to devel@, from advisory-bo...@. - Forwarded message from Matt Domsch - Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:03:05 -0600 From: Matt Domsch To: advisory-bo...@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) https://fedoraprojec

Re: CLA problems (was: Re: Install fedora-easy-karma by default?)

2010-03-11 Thread Mike McGrath
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:20:11AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On 03/11/2010 02:14 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > > > > > Can you leave bodhi feedback with an FAS account if you haven't signed a > > > CLA? (The thing about FAS accounts I am not crazy ab

CLA problems (was: Re: Install fedora-easy-karma by default?)

2010-03-11 Thread Till Maas
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:20:11AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/11/2010 02:14 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > > > Can you leave bodhi feedback with an FAS account if you haven't signed a > > CLA? (The thing about FAS accounts I am not crazy about is the CLA. What > > about using a bugzilla

Re: Install fedora-easy-karma by default?

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/11/2010 02:14 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> >> Can you leave bodhi feedback with an FAS account if you haven't signed a >> CLA? (The thing about FAS accounts I am not crazy about is the CLA. What >> about using a bugzilla account instead?) >> > > What is the problem yo

Re: Push scripts, mash (was: Re: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

2010-03-11 Thread Seth Vidal
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Kevin Kofler wrote: >> as long as you require only a few 32-bit packages, requesting them >> explicitly is not the end of the world. So if we were to drop support >> for that "always install all libs as multilibs" option > > Eh? I didn't even know th

Re: Push scripts, mash (was: Re: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Kevin Kofler wrote: > as long as you require only a few 32-bit packages, requesting them > explicitly is not the end of the world. So if we were to drop support > for that "always install all libs as multilibs" option Eh? I didn't even know there was such an option. And I agree, /that/ should be

[Bug 513596] perl-DBD-CSV-0.2002 is available

2010-03-11 Thread bugzilla
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=513596 Marcela Mašláňová changed: What|Removed |Added -

rpms/perl-DBD-CSV/devel perl-DBD-CSV.spec,1.10,1.11

2010-03-11 Thread Marcela Mašláňová
Author: mmaslano Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-DBD-CSV/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2708 Modified Files: perl-DBD-CSV.spec Log Message: * Thu Mar 11 2010 Marcela Mašláňová - 0.27-1 - update - replace DESTDIR Index: perl-DBD-CSV.spec =

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Enrico Scholz
Tomas Mraz writes: >> We never remove users or groups created by packages. > > Someone should perhaps correct the > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageUserCreation then. fwiw, %__fe_userdel + %__fe_groupdel evaluate to a noop in rawhide (unless, '--with fedora_userdel' is set). Enrico -- de

Re: Fedora::App::MaintainerTools 0.006

2010-03-11 Thread Gabor Szabo
Hi Chris, funny I just bumped into your module while searching for a module that would abstract out the information from META.yml. Would you suggest to use the CPAN::MetaMuncher in your package or something else? In the former case would it be possible to put it in its own CPAN package? regards

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Bill Nottingham
Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said: > The FPC is aware that the page exists but pretty much left it alone as it > documents a program, fedora-usermgmt, that Enrico Scholz wrote to solve > issues with user creation in the way that he thought best. However, if it's > causing confusion we sho

rawhide report: 20100311 changes

2010-03-11 Thread Rawhide Report
Compose started at Thu Mar 11 08:15:14 UTC 2010 Broken deps for i386 -- accountsdialog-0.5.1-1.fc14.i686 requires libcheese-gtk.so.17 calibre-0.6.42-1.fc14.i686 requires libMagickCore.so.2 calibre-0.6.42-1.fc14.i686 re

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Toshio Kuratomi
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:35:13PM +0100, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:04 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > """ > > We never remove users or groups created by packages. There's no sane way to > > check if files owned by those users/groups are left behind (and even if > > there woul

Example of karma not being functional [Was:POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl]

2010-03-11 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 03/11/2010 02:52 PM, Mat Booth wrote: > Saw this in today's updates: > > >Cleanup: cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-4.fc12.i686 > 195/254 > groupdel: group 'saslauth' does not exist > Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl >

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Tomas Mraz
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:04 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 02:31:43PM -, Quentin Armitage wrote: > > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=572399 > > > > > >> groupdel: group 'saslauth' does not exist Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet > >> failure > >> in rpm pac

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Toshio Kuratomi
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 02:31:43PM -, Quentin Armitage wrote: > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=572399 > > >> groupdel: group 'saslauth' does not exist Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure >> in rpm package cyrus-sasl >> warning: %postun(cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-4.fc12.i686) scriptlet

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Alexander Kahl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/11/2010 03:05 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 11:53 +0100, Alexander Kahl wrote: >> Oh, and by the way, we could leave behind all those discussions >> regarding dynamic linking: RPATH for everything and everyone. If you've >> linked

Re: Hard drive spec change

2010-03-11 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 05:28:14PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote: > benefits. Most users don't even need 1/10 of .2TiB, much less the 2TiB at Famous last words! -- Matthew Miller Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services Computing & Information Technology Harvard Sc

RE: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Quentin Armitage
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=572399 -Original Message- From: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Mat Booth Sent: 11 March 2010 13:52 To: Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: POSTUN scriptlet fai

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:53:18 +0100, Alexander Kahl wrote: > > There are of course cases where package maintainer work and QA can > improve rollback quality: I got burned a while back by a Sunbird change (maybe in a library it uses) that broke access to my local calendar data. I was not a h

Re: POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread yersinia
n Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Mat Booth wrote: > Saw this in today's updates: > > > Cleanup: cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-4.fc12.i686 > 195/254 > groupdel: group 'saslauth' does not exist > Already fixed -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedorapr

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Tomas Mraz
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 11:53 +0100, Alexander Kahl wrote: > Most of what is described here is already covered by Nix (leaving out > the hardware driver part). > > This is why I endorse dumping yum, RPM *and* the stupid FHS in favor of > Nix, focusing all development on something that is clearly su

Re: What happened to mercurial-1.5-2.fc11?

2010-03-11 Thread Mamoru Tasaka
Neal Becker wrote, at 03/11/2010 09:52 PM +9:00: > fc13 and fc12 are shown here: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/search/mercurial?_csrf_token=9d135a7a59b1892cc911a5f075633fb7dd4ef993 > > But not fc11. So I tried to rebuild, and got: > 2046149 build (dist-f11-updates-candidate, > /cvs/p

POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl

2010-03-11 Thread Mat Booth
Saw this in today's updates: Cleanup: cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-4.fc12.i686 195/254 groupdel: group 'saslauth' does not exist Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package cyrus-sasl warning: %postun(cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-4.fc12.i686) scriptlet

Re: QA's Package update policy proposal

2010-03-11 Thread Al Dunsmuir
Hello Kevin, Thursday, March 11, 2010, 8:09:02 AM, you wrote: > Al Dunsmuir wrote: >> For older releases, the presumption/requirement for stability is >> higher. > Nonsense. The previous and current stable releases are both equally > supported, there isn't one which is "more stable" than

Re: Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

2010-03-11 Thread Alexander Kahl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/11/2010 02:16 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Alexander Kahl wrote: > >> On 03/10/2010 08:26 PM, Steven I Usdansky wrote: >>> If there's a magic solution that will satisfy the vast majority >>> of Fedora users, I have absolutely no clue as to what it

  1   2   >