On 2010/07/03 8:09 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> I've started using monit recently, so I volunteer to co-maintain it as
> well (salimma on pkgdb)
>
> Cheers,
>
Thanks! I've approved your and Maxim's request.
Stewart
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorapr
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 02:21:22 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> The added complication is that the criterion is when the package was last
> touched before being orphaned (and some people say it should be when it was
> last touched by the maintainer, which is even longer ago in qgis's case),
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 01:40:52 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Sorry, but qgis has been orphaned and not updated for more than 3 months, so
> it needs a rereview as per:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package_Proce
Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Would be nice if our package database supports freezing up packages
> that should not be claimed -- and automatically do that once a package
> is orphaned for long enough?
The added complication is that the criterion is when the package was last
touched before bein
I've started using monit recently, so I volunteer to co-maintain it as
well (salimma on pkgdb)
Cheers,
--
Michel
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
> you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Maxim Burgerho
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
>> will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
>> a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
>> I am going to try to get
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
> will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
> a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
> I am going to try to get it updated to 1.4 and see how things go. If it
> works out
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just pushed a version 0.7.5 of bodhi into production. This release
> contains the following notable changes:
>
> proventesters & strict critical path update handling
>
>
> Critica
Hi all,
Some key audio packages appear to be missing from RHEL-6, even though
they are in RHEL 5 (not in EPEL):
e.g. attempting to build libfishsound, I get the following error in EL-6:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=22931
DEBUG util.py:256: No Package Found for flac-devel
D
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/07/10 03:25 AM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/07/10 03:25 AM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratch
method but
>> ended up with that result[1]. Here is attached spec fi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/07/10 04:13 AM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
>> error: File not found:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/gimp-2.7.1-1.fc13.x86_64/usr/li
> b64/libgimp-2.0.so.0.600.1
>
> is version hard-coded in spec %files
You can view at the spec file I attached on the origi
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 20:40 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > That only handles a subset of the 'broken dependencies' problem. We've
> > already had an example this year of a dependency issue the proposed
> > autoqa depcheck test wouldn't catch, and Michael's script didn't - the
> > nss-softokn
I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
I am going to try to get it updated to 1.4 and see how things go. If it
works out for roleplaying, I'll be a long t
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 10:05:07 -0700, Adam wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 18:24 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 07/02/2010 06:20 PM, Will Woods wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The main reasons we want to perform testing are things like: to avoid
> > > pushing updates with broken dependencies, or updates
Colin Walters wrote, at 07/04/2010 03:23 AM +9:00:
> Author: walters
>
> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/shared-mime-info/devel
> In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv21405
>
> Modified Files:
> shared-mime-info.spec
> Log Message:
> * Sat Jul 3 2010 Colin Walters - 0.71-3
> - Re
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:50:53PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 15:37 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> > A suggestion: when critical path updates hit updates-testing, a
> > notification should go to both devel@lists.fedoraproject.org and
> > q...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> How would you find out whether that's the case? - You would need to talk
> to the package maintainer(s). Having arbitrary provenpackagers perform
> random upgrades won't do it.
We need to get packagers to document the reason why they're not upgrading
some package in a st
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:33:04PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:48:43PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > I have updated the page.
> >
> > Does it look clear now? Re-wording or tweaks very welcome.
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_acceptance_criteria
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 18:24 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 06:20 PM, Will Woods wrote:
>
>
> > The main reasons we want to perform testing are things like: to avoid
> > pushing updates with broken dependencies, or updates that cause serious
> > regressions requiring manual intervent
On Saturday, July 03, 2010 08:14:57 am Paul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to build under mock currently but am getting the following
> throwback (both as su and as me)
>
> ERROR: Exception(rpmbuild/SRPMS/VirtualBox-OSE-3.2.6-1.src.rpm)
> Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) 0 minutes 36 seconds
> INFO: Re
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
>> I'm sorry, i can't agree with you here. Being more aggressive, putting
>> pressure on whatever just to have the latest versions of all the
>> software around in rawhide, sounds to me like we would go and break
>> rawhid
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:33 +0200, Kevin wrote:
> Rawhide should always have the latest upstream release unless there's a
> strong reason why a particular release needs to be skipped (i.e. it's
> broken, it contains illegal stuff or something like that).
How would you find out whether that's the
Great! Just apply for access in PackageDB and I'll grant you access.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/monit
Cheers,
Stewart
On 2010/07/03 3:32 AM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
> you.
>
> Regards,
>
>
Adam Miller wrote:
> If there are any discrepancy with the proventesters critpath policy then
> please feel free to file a ticket with FESCo and allow our elected
> officials decide the fate of this.
There isn't any such discrepancy, it's the policy which is broken and FESCo
which refuses to unde
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Ridiculous. :( The way you've phrased it doesn't meet the "be excellent"
> guidelines IMO. There is nothing "completely unacceptable" or "against
> Fedora's objectives" with skipping certain upstream releases. And I hope
> that nobody will become "more aggressive" or try t
On 07/03/2010 10:16 AM, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
>> Le 03/07/2010 10:02, Iain Arnell a écrit :
>>
How this should be handled nicely ?
>>>
>>> Exactly as it is at the minute - continue allow perl modules to share
>>> directory ownership.
>>>
>>>
Thomas Janssen wrote:
> I'm sorry, i can't agree with you here. Being more aggressive, putting
> pressure on whatever just to have the latest versions of all the
> software around in rawhide, sounds to me like we would go and break
> rawhide a lot.
> I thought rawhide should be more useful and less
Hi,
I'm trying to build under mock currently but am getting the following
throwback (both as su and as me)
ERROR: Exception(rpmbuild/SRPMS/VirtualBox-OSE-3.2.6-1.src.rpm)
Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) 0 minutes 36 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result
ER
Matthias Clasen wrote:
> uzbl-core
Rebuilt.
--Ben
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Compose started at Sat Jul 3 08:15:05 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
BackupPC-3.1.0-14.fc14.noarch requires perl-suidperl
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requires libgladeui-1.so.9
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requir
On 07/03/2010 04:05 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> Most of the packages listed here are not up to date:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&query_format=advanced&bug_status=ASSIGNED&email1=upstream-release-monitoring%40fedoraproject.org&product=Fedora
Yeah but this
perl-DBI-Dumper has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
On i386:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as
perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Class-MOP/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14734
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Class-MOP.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 1.03-1
- update to latest upstream
- re-enable tests
- BR Test::Le
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Class-MOP:
96b44730ae040c30d5e8e85b48e8cbe7 Class-MOP-1.03.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 01:03:41PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
> > Also Bodhi does not allow to [...]
>
> Bodhi ought to meet the package maintainers' requirements, not vice versa.
> If you determine a problem with the typical work-flow, how ab
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 01:03:41PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
>
> > This is not true, because there can be runtime dependencies on another
> > update in -testing that is not build dependency, e.g. if an python app
> > requires a newer version o
> error: File not found:
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/gimp-2.7.1-1.fc13.x86_64/usr/li
b64/libgimp-2.0.so.0.600.1
is version hard-coded in spec %files
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
> This is not true, because there can be runtime dependencies on another
> update in -testing that is not build dependency, e.g. if an python app
> requires a newer version of a python module.
1) To make such run-time deps BuildRequires would be hel
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:27:50PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:12:26 +0200, Till wrote:
>
> > Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> > deps manually?
>
> Every packager can [configure and] run repoclosure from yum-utils.
> Enable upda
On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 18:08:03 +0800, Chen wrote:
> I'm fully agree with you, but there are some maintainers who don't
> respond on bugzilla at all or for a very long time. They may be still
> active on koji, but they don't respond even when you attach a
> patch/spec to solve known issues or request
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 07:43:26PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 07:37 PM, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > Ok, this policy was for the other case, a case when the maintainer
> > does not respond. I am not saying that it happens a lot, but it
> > happened in the past, and the syslog-ng case
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Statistics-Descriptive/F-13
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv7976
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Statistics-Descriptive.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 3.0200-1
- update to latest upstream versi
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:12:26 +0200, Till wrote:
> Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> deps manually?
Every packager can [configure and] run repoclosure from yum-utils.
Enable updates-testing, and optionally add a local repo for your own
candidate builds. It s
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Statistics-Descriptive/EL-6
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv7483
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Statistics-Descriptive.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 3.0200-1
- update to latest upstream versi
Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
> Hello,
>
> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratch method but
> ended up with that result[1]. Here is attached spec file borrowed from Nils
> as I
> wanted to experiment that version along with Design. Can anyone
2010/7/3 Michael Schwendt :
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:40:57 +0200, Kevin wrote:
>
>>
>> It is part of the Fedora Objectives:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives
>> to "be on the leading edge of free and open source technology". Given that,
>> it is completely unacceptable to not upgrade sof
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 06:31:35AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 08:12 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> > deps manually?
> Like ordinary packagers should do ;)
>
> The only difference between provenpackagers and "o
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:40:57 +0200, Kevin wrote:
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
> > You have to accept the maintainers decision to not update it yet? What
> > do you think will happen if everyone builds the wishes he has and
> > breaks a lot of stuff with it? Anarchy? We have processes for that in
> > Fe
If there are any discrepancy with the proventesters critpath policy then
please feel free to file a ticket with FESCo and allow our elected officials
decide the fate of this.
-AdamM (From Android)
On Jul 2, 2010 8:16 PM, "Kevin Kofler" wrote:
Will Woods wrote:
> The main reasons we want to perf
Hi,
I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
you.
Regards,
Maxim Burgerhout (wz...@fedoraproject.org)
On 2010-07-02 7:55 PM, "Stewart Adam" wrote:
Hi,
I packaged monit a while ago but never really got around to using it as I
found Nagios to be more suitab
53 matches
Mail list logo
