I don't have any packages currently that anybody actually uses. I'd love to
join up and help a larger part of the community.
-Eric
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have a package (ghemical) which requires a courier 12 font for use in
its xwindow gui. I clearly need some dependency that will drag in
xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-100dpi
or
xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-75dpi
but those probably depend on the actual user's
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:03, Tom London wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Paul F. Johnson
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After the recent rawhide to nautilus 2.90.1-1.fc15.i686, it's stopped
> > working claiming that I don't have Settings schema
> > 'org.gnome.desktop.lockdown' installed.
>
"Matt McCutchen" wrote:
>IIUC, the f15/ namespace will not exist until F15 is branched. You
>should just push to refs/heads/user/steved/pnfs-f15 .
>
Or use -rawhide, since master always builds for rawhide.
--
Sent from my Android phone. Please excuse my brevity.
--
devel mailing list
devel
"Steve Dickson" wrote:
>$ git push origin origin/master:refs/heads/f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15Total 0
>(delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
>remote: C refs/heads/f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15 steved DENIED by
>refs/heads/f[0-9][0-9]
>remote: error: hook declined to update refs/heads/f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 22:14 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
> When I do a:
> git push --dry-run origin origin/master:refs/heads/f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15
> To ssh://ste...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/kernel
> * [new branch] origin/master -> f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15
>
> which appears to do what I want
When I do a:
git push --dry-run origin origin/master:refs/heads/f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15
To ssh://ste...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/kernel
* [new branch] origin/master -> f15/user/steved/pnfs-f15
which appears to do what I want.. but when I remove the --dry-run I get:
$ git push origin origin/m
I don't currently maintain any Java packages within Fedora but I did
(somewhat) build the maven2 stack for EPEL[0] and I would be
interested in seeing a Java SIG happen as well as would definitely
join up.
-AdamM
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MavenEPEL
--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:36 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
> or fix your repo".
Or a "branch" file... :D
--
Matt
--
devel mailing list
devel@lis
On 08/31/2010 08:36 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
> or fix your repo".
Exactly Give us a way to supply the needed info so the tree
can be create
Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
or fix your repo".
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 5:16 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
> I guess I don't understand why all this state is needed to simply
> lay down the tar ball and apply the current patches... The tar ball
> and patches have nothing to do with the version of Fedora or
> the sta
On 08/31/2010 07:51 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 8/31/10 4:45 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On 8/31/10 3:48 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
>>> Just curious
>>
>>> Why does 'fedpkg prep' care that the repo is in an inconsistent state?
>>
>>> I just
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 05:58:49PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> Thanks for taking care of this, Kyle.
>
> Should I send this patch upstream? if so, 1 patch per hardware?
> do/should I get sign-off's?
>
Ideally, yes, you'll want to email the maintainer something like:
From: Luke ...
Subject: [PA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 4:45 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 8/31/10 3:48 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
>> Just curious
>
>> Why does 'fedpkg prep' care that the repo is in an inconsistent state?
>
>> I just did a rebase to the latest f14 code on a private branch.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 3:48 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
> Just curious
>
> Why does 'fedpkg prep' care that the repo is in an inconsistent state?
>
> I just did a rebase to the latest f14 code on a private branch.
> So yes he repo in an inconsistent but that i
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:20 -0400, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
> Please do not ignore that the browser is there for the user to use,
> not for Fedora to stream information in spite of the user's wishes.
>
> This is Linux, not some Microsoft (or Apple) "we know what is best for
> you" system.
> Al
>
>
Just curious
Why does 'fedpkg prep' care that the repo is in an inconsistent state?
I just did a rebase to the latest f14 code on a private branch.
So yes he repo in an inconsistent but that is ok. I'm going to
make some changes to put it back in a consistent state but
I can not do that wit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 9:40 AM, Thomas Moschny wrote:
> 2010/8/31 Jesse Keating :
>> An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
>> acceptable as an update to a stable release. Only severe exceptions
>> should be made to this rule, where the t
Thanks for taking care of this, Kyle.
Should I send this patch upstream? if so, 1 patch per hardware?
do/should I get sign-off's?
Thanks,
luke
On 08/31/2010 05:23 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> commit 3c5d4de07ca16d799f1ca63454b56a03456191fe
> Author: Kyle McMartin
> Date: Tue Aug 31 17:23:33 20
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2010-08-31)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 19:30:01 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-08-31/fesco.2010-08-31-19.30.log.html
Meeting summary
-
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:46:53 -0400,
Matt McCutchen wrote:
>
> The update page is remote. If you want to disable it, set
> "startup.homepage_override_url" to the empty string. There is also
> "startup.homepage_welcome_url" for the first run of the browser.
Thanks!
--
devel mailing list
d
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 16:30 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:20:23 -0400,
> Al Dunsmuir wrote:
> >
> > Please do not ignore that the browser is there for the user to use,
> > not for Fedora to stream information in spite of the user's wishes.
>
> Nor for Mozilla to
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 15:56 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:26:27PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> > Maybe I was too long winded, or failed to communicate my point: a
>> > stable (bug fix only updates, slow fea
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:20:23 -0400,
Al Dunsmuir wrote:
>
> Please do not ignore that the browser is there for the user to use,
> not for Fedora to stream information in spite of the user's wishes.
Nor for Mozilla to track its users. There shouldn't be a start page at
all as it opens a c
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 08:50:01PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Marius Andreiana
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There's a long standing bug which prevents FC14 to boot on most EFI systems
> > :
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528232
> >
> > Would a kn
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010, 4:59:27 PM, Matt wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> It doesn't seem to be an unavoidable requirement, it says:
>>
>> "If you proposed Start/Home Page is not similar to the existing Firefox
>> Start Page, please be prepared to provide
commit 8ba06820b461a5c800311c1aff83c66feceb2fb1
Merge: 7fca267 abcb68e
Author: Xavier Bachelot
Date: Tue Aug 31 22:58:39 2010 +0200
sync with devel
perl-Set-Infinite.spec | 36
sources|2 +-
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 5 de
Summary of changes:
2d5e5a8... Use fixperms macro instead of our own chmod incantation. BR (*)
8fcf13e... - Adjust License-tag. - BR: perl(Test::More) (BZ 419631). (*)
e278ad7... new perl (*)
92b56d0... Update to 0.63. (*)
a30b372... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 16:59 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > It doesn't seem to be an unavoidable requirement, it says:
> >
> > "If you proposed Start/Home Page is not similar to the existing Firefox
> > Start Page, please be prepared to
commit 694c62296cd62bc5de8295cd6317e142184df707
Merge: c6de05a abcb68e
Author: Xavier Bachelot
Date: Tue Aug 31 23:00:27 2010 +0200
sync with devel
perl-Set-Infinite.spec | 36
sources|2 +-
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 5 de
Summary of changes:
2d5e5a8... Use fixperms macro instead of our own chmod incantation. BR (*)
8fcf13e... - Adjust License-tag. - BR: perl(Test::More) (BZ 419631). (*)
e278ad7... new perl (*)
92b56d0... Update to 0.63. (*)
a30b372... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11
On 30 August 2010 15:17, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> There has been an effort few years back to start Java SIG but it didn't
> work out in the end (no idea why). I decided it's time to try again :-)
>
> I would like to start Java SIG for a lot of reasons. Some of them:
>
> * Pa
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It doesn't seem to be an unavoidable requirement, it says:
>
> "If you proposed Start/Home Page is not similar to the existing Firefox
> Start Page, please be prepared to provide a rationale for the change,
> and how it would benefit the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 9:40 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Jesse Keating
> wrote:
>> An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
>> acceptable as an update to a stable release. Only severe exceptions
>> should be
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 13:45 -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 20:41 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> > Great stuff. And there's more in there too. So the current User_base in
> > addition to being not very well linked and referenced could hardly be
> > described as reflecting all of the
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> It is not meant to be a complaint at you or a request for you to do more
> work. It's a complaint at the state of the world. (Why not find the
> biggest windmill of all to tilt at?)
I didn't mean for you to think it was a complaint. If I
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 15:56 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:26:27PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > Maybe I was too long winded, or failed to communicate my point: a
> > stable (bug fix only updates, slow feature release), strongly FOSS,
> > strongly upstream seems to b
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:26:27PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> Maybe I was too long winded, or failed to communicate my point: a
>> stable (bug fix only updates, slow feature release), strongly FOSS,
>> strongly upstream seems to be wh
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:03 +0100, Piscium wrote:
> Some people like everything up-to-date, while others are more
> conservative. Fine. Isn't there a middle ground?
>
> Currently there are these repos: updates and updates_testing.
>
> Maybe two more repos could be added: updates_fixes and updates
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:26:27PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Maybe I was too long winded, or failed to communicate my point: a
> stable (bug fix only updates, slow feature release), strongly FOSS,
> strongly upstream seems to be what some (I am not going to make
> assumptions about numbers)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/31/2010 11:12 AM, seth vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:04 +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
>> Am Montag, den 30.08.2010, 10:08 -0400 schrieb seth vidal:
>>> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 16:04 +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
Hi,
I canno
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:57 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>>> Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
>>> (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 19:57 +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>> > Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
>> > (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell an
Jeff Spaleta (jspal...@gmail.com) said:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > That's gross. (I realize you're blocked on the sites you rely on, but
> > geez, can't you find sites with real APIs?)
>
> It is what it is. Though I do like being given credit for doing
> deve
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:57 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>> Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
>> (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
>> to CC me for other fallout.
>
> Thi
* Bill Nottingham [31/08/2010 21:01] :
>
> That's gross.
Yup, no question about it.
> (I realize you're blocked on the sites you rely on, but
> geez, can't you find sites with real APIs?)
For some of them, it is possible (DVDfr.com has a stable XML API and the
webmaster has contrib
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 19:57 +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> > Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
> > (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
> > to CC me for other fallout.
>
Some people like everything up-to-date, while others are more
conservative. Fine. Isn't there a middle ground?
Currently there are these repos: updates and updates_testing.
Maybe two more repos could be added: updates_fixes and updates_enhancements.
After a package stays for a while in updates_t
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
> (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
> to CC me for other fallout.
This will break meego.
Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorapr
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> That's gross. (I realize you're blocked on the sites you rely on, but
> geez, can't you find sites with real APIs?)
It is what it is. Though I do like being given credit for doing
development work that I'm not actually responsible for. M
Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
(master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
to CC me for other fallout.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am Dienstag, den 31.08.2010, 13:11 -0500 schrieb Michael Cronenworth:
> Christoph Höger wrote:
> > Seems like I should open up a bug report or something.
>
> Searching the mailing lists[1] is sometimes helpful as well.
>
> [1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-July/138765.html
Jeff Spaleta (jspal...@gmail.com) said:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Emmanuel Seyman
> wrote:
> > Same goes for programs that scrape web pages (I'm thinking of gcstar but
> > I'm sure there are others). If the page layout changes, the page scraper
> > needs to be updated and that usually in
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:04 +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
> Am Montag, den 30.08.2010, 10:08 -0400 schrieb seth vidal:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 16:04 +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I cannot use gnupg2 from evolution anymore. Apparently somewhere in
> > > evolution the command
Christoph Höger wrote:
> Seems like I should open up a bug report or something.
Searching the mailing lists[1] is sometimes helpful as well.
[1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-July/138765.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.or
Am Montag, den 30.08.2010, 10:08 -0400 schrieb seth vidal:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 16:04 +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I cannot use gnupg2 from evolution anymore. Apparently somewhere in
> > evolution the command "gpg" is hardwired, while whe only have gpg2
> > nowadays.
> >
> > A
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Emmanuel Seyman
wrote:
> Same goes for programs that scrape web pages (I'm thinking of gcstar but
> I'm sure there are others). If the page layout changes, the page scraper
> needs to be updated and that usually involves updating the package.
Yep.. gourmet does th
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 20:41 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> Great stuff. And there's more in there too. So the current User_base in
> addition to being not very well linked and referenced could hardly be
> described as reflecting all of the views in this particular thread.
Should it really reflect al
* Bruno Wolff III [31/08/2010 19:25] :
>
> Packages that need to sync to external servers or peers such as multiplayer
> games have similar issues. You need to be up to date to for the package
> to be useful in some cases.
Same goes for programs that scrape web pages (I'm thinking of gcstar but
I'
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:08 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> Again, I feel it is necessary to have a survey of Fedora users.
That's users you've already got. It might make the users you already
have happier, sure, and that's a fine thing to do. Iif you want to grow,
though, you may be limiting yourself
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 09:58 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> On 08/30/2010 10:50 PM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> > The attention to freedom is not unique. The attention to upstream is
>> > invisible to users.
>>
>> But it is why I want to *
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:51:27AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> I would like to see some per package exceptions to this policy that don't
> need to be revisited for every update.
I think it's reasonable to put packages into different tiers. Or "lanes", if
we don't want to think in terms of whic
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 09:58 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 08/30/2010 10:50 PM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > The attention to freedom is not unique. The attention to upstream is
> > invisible to users.
>
> But it is why I want to *develop* for Fedora.
You cut out the rest of Arthur's email, wh
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> Things like Firefox, and Thunderbird have large external teams
> maintaining them who appear to have goals around ensuring a consistent
> user experience, with testing, and so forth, over and above just getting
> new features. They even do self
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 18:18 +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 17:39:11 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 8/31/10 6:57 AM, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > > there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
> >
> > An update that changes behavior for the end us
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:40:29 -0800,
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>
> I'm a package maintainer for one such application. I have yet to hear
> from a single user...ever..that tracking releases from upstream has
> been unwanted for this specific application regardless of the UI
> tweaks that happen bet
2010/8/31 Jesse Keating :
> An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
> acceptable as an update to a stable release. Only severe exceptions
> should be made to this rule, where the time/effort to backport the
> important fixes from a new upstream release are cost prohibitive
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
> acceptable as an update to a stable release. Only severe exceptions
> should be made to this rule, where the time/effort to backport the
> important fixes from a new upstream
On 08/31/2010 12:26 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 07:05, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> It depends on whether Fedora is a platform for development. If it is,
>> developers usually do not want many changes.
>>
>
> It depends on the type of developer and what they are doing
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 06:08:09PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > > > > there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in
> > > > > updates-testing
> > > > I hope you are kidding.
> > > nope, I'm 100 % serious
> > Unfortunately, then: this does not currently match reality.
> that's not an
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 07:05, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 08/31/2010 11:26 AM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> Strongly free and tracking upstream is something developers would
>> appreciate, however bug fix only updates are often contrary to what
>> developers want and outlier users like myself.
>
>
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 17:39:11 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 8/31/10 6:57 AM, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
>
> An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
> acceptable as an update to a stable release. On
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 17:36:39 Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 05:31:43PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > > > > So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely
> > > > > a bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release.
> > > >
> > > > th
On 08/30/2010 10:50 PM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> The attention to freedom is not unique. The attention to upstream is
> invisible to users.
But it is why I want to *develop* for Fedora.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division
On 08/30/2010 10:48 PM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> So developers are going to put new features into rawhide knowing that
> they will never make it to updates?
I do it all the time because I know it will be out ~ 6 months, which is pretty
quick.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 6:57 AM, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
An update that changes behavior for the end user would never be
acceptable as an update to a stable release. Only severe exceptions
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 05:31:43PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > > > So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely a
> > > > bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release.
> > > there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
> > I
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:27:59AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It doesn't seem to be an unavoidable requirement, it says:
>
> "If you proposed Start/Home Page is not similar to the existing Firefox
> Start Page, please be prepared to provide a rationale for the change,
> and how it would benef
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 16:14:39 Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 03:57:47PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > > So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely a
> > > bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release.
> >
> > there's no reason
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:54 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:47 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:33 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > > Where do you see somebody proposing that no updates be issued? Where do
> > > you see somebody proposing a setup wh
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:39 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:19 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Fedora gets to build and ship a slightly-modified version of Firefox while
> > retaining the Firefox name due to a distribution partner agreement with
> > Mozilla. Mozilla gets th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 5:33 AM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> Developers put new features in rawhide knowing that they will be in the
>> next release of Fedora, which would be at the /most/ 6 months from the
>>
Compose started at Tue Aug 31 13:15:27 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.i686 requires libgnarl-4.4.so
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.i686 requires libgnat-4.4.so
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.x86_64 req
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the F-14 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 po
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 03:57:47PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely a
> > bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release.
> there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
I hope you are k
...
> So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely a
> bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release.
there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing
> >So, web developers want latest httpd/PHP/Rails/MySQL; GNOME developers
> >want
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:13 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> (Is it actually impossible for the vesa driver to work after
> KMS has kicked in, btw, or is it just something that doesn't work at
> present?)
Right now, it may work or it may not. Typically the vesa bios assumes
it's the only thing th
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 00:45:49 -0400,
> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> >
> > So far the only brokeness I have had in all of F13 is with `seabios-bin`.
>
> Wasn't there recently a packagekit problem where it stopped doing updates,
> making it kind of ha
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 00:45:49 -0400,
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> So far the only brokeness I have had in all of F13 is with `seabios-bin`.
Wasn't there recently a packagekit problem where it stopped doing updates,
making it kind of hard to get a fix unless you knew about yum? That's
a prett
On 08/31/2010 11:26 AM, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Strongly free and tracking upstream is something developers would
> appreciate, however bug fix only updates are often contrary to what
> developers want and outlier users like myself.
It depends on whether Fedora is a platform for development. I
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:47 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:33 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Where do you see somebody proposing that no updates be issued? Where do
> > you see somebody proposing a setup where fixing a graphics card can't be
> > done in the stable relea
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/30/2010 06:07 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I've orphaned the following packages if anyone wants to pick them up.
>> They are primarily dead upstream but some might still use the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/30/2010 06:07 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've orphaned the following packages if anyone wants to pick them up.
> They are primarily dead upstream but some might still use them.
>
> libmatchbox
> matchbox-window-manager
> twitter-glib
>
>
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:19 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Fedora gets to build and ship a slightly-modified version of Firefox while
> retaining the Firefox name due to a distribution partner agreement with
> Mozilla. Mozilla gets their money from Google. I don't think we *can* make
> it something
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Developers put new features in rawhide knowing that they will be in the
> next release of Fedora, which would be at the /most/ 6 months from the
> time they drop the feature.
It's more like 9 months. A feature has to wait until the next br
Hi,
While experimenting using an USB stick with a keyfile for a LUKS
filesystem (not one of the basic ones), I found out this actually
seems to work, but I'm not sure of this "by design" or just
accidentally.
In rc.sysinit, the stick (in fstab with UUID) is mounted and later
the luksOpen seems to
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:48:02AM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > New features hit rawhide all the time, with no waiting period.
> So developers are going to put new features into rawhide knowing that
> they will never make it to updates?
That seems like an excellent model, yes. When the next
On 08/31/2010 11:55 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> Andrew Haley píše v Út 31. 08. 2010 v 09:40 +0100:
>> On 08/31/2010 05:42 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> I'm saying that these changes were made in the face of extreme
>>> resistance on Kevin's (and other's) parts. So whatever the outcome it's
>>> alr
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:52:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Yeah, there really doesn't seem any particular reason for the search box
> to be there, unless Google was paying us for it to be there or
> something.
Fedora gets to build and ship a slightly-modified version of Firefox while
retai
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
