Jesse Keating píše v Út 06. 11. 2012 v 10:48 -0800:
> On 11/06/2012 03:35 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > And rel-engs actively prohibits staging as much as they can [1], where
> > it should be encouraged IMO.
> >
> > Vit
> >
> >
> > [1] https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4580
>
>
> Additio
The nomination period for FAmSCo (Fedora Ambassador Steering Committee),
FESCo (Fedora Engineering Steering Committee), and the Fedora Board is
now open, and will close on November 13, 2012, at 23:59:59 UTC.
This election cycle will fill the following seats for a one-year period:
* Fedora Board
On 11/06/2012 11:34 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
Jesse, please review and apply these upstream and make a new update.
Fixed comments. Other patch
(fedpkg-1.10-use-nil-to-unset-distunset.patch) is fine as is.
Tweaked and pushed. Building an update now.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feat
Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 21:47 +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> > I have a Wifi card that is supposed to be managed by the "network"
> > service. The interface's IP addresses, prefixes, routes and all that
> > get assigned correctly on boot, but the wireless parameters – mode,
> > E
Hi,
I'm trying to sort out a pulseaudio issue. It's failing to acknowledge
a request (from Jack) to release a device. I've tried the pulseaudio
list but haven't had any answers. The full thread is here:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/2012-November/015210.html
This is an
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 21:47 +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> I have a Wifi card that is supposed to be managed by the "network"
> service. The interface's IP addresses, prefixes, routes and all that get
> assigned correctly on boot, but the wireless parameters – mode, ESSID
> and channel – do not g
I have a Wifi card that is supposed to be managed by the "network"
service. The interface's IP addresses, prefixes, routes and all that get
assigned correctly on boot, but the wireless parameters – mode, ESSID
and channel – do not get assigned. I have to set those manually with the
iwconfig com
Le 06/11/2012 20:19, Mark Bidewell a écrit :
> oddly this looks a lot like the Ubuntu release cycle if you replace
> stable with LTS
Ubuntu LTS in about 5 years lifetime. Other releases have a lifetime of
18mo.
For now, there is 5 maintained ubuntu versions at the same time (the
older is from 2008
On 11/06/2012 07:54 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
One have to say the hard truth - only the latest fedora release is supported by
many maintainers because that's what they/we use.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
Please read and follow the mailinglist guidelines...
JBG
--
devel maili
One have to say the hard truth - only the latest fedora release is supported by
many maintainers because that's what they/we use.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
- Original Message -
> From: "Matthieu Gautier"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 22:24 +0300, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> 2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
>
> > Hum.. It should be some misunderstanding somewhere :
>
> Definitely. Please stop talking about things you have no idea about.
You can also just show him where he is wrong rather than being pedantic.
Aft
On 11/06/2012 02:00 PM, Tom Callaway wrote:
> Okay, so here are two patches:
>
> fedpkg-1.10-use-nil-to-unset-distunset.patch (this one uses %nil instead
> of 0 in my previous fix)
> fedpkg-1.10-unset-runtime-disttag.patch (this patch detects the runtime
> environment and unsets the version speci
2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
> Hum.. It should be some misunderstanding somewhere :
Definitely. Please stop talking about things you have no idea about.
--
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/d
oddly this looks a lot like the Ubuntu release cycle if you replace stable
with LTS
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Jason Brooks wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 10:55 AM, Matthieu Gautier wrote:
>
> No, I never suggest that. Preview versions have a timelife of 6mo
>> instead of 12.
>> Stable version ha
Le 06/11/2012 20:05, Peter Lemenkov a écrit :
> 2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
>>> So you not a maintainer but you still suggesting that we, maintainers,
>>> should do 2 times more job by supporting several simultaneous Fedora
>>> versions instead of 3 right now for more than two years. And that's
>>
On 11/06/2012 10:55 AM, Matthieu Gautier wrote:
No, I never suggest that. Preview versions have a timelife of 6mo
instead of 12.
Stable version have a lifetime of 24mo (12mo for regular updates)
instead of 12.
The cycle would have to go: stable, preview, preview, stable, and so on
to avoid ma
2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
>> So you not a maintainer but you still suggesting that we, maintainers,
>> should do 2 times more job by supporting several simultaneous Fedora
>> versions instead of 3 right now for more than two years. And that's
>> all just because you think it's a good idea to spe
On 10/23/2012 04:54 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Lo!
>
> On 23.10.2012 17:23, Tom Callaway wrote:
>> On 10/22/2012 10:37 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> On 10/22/2012 10:43 PM, Tom Callaway wrote:
On 10/22/2012 12:09 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> There is currently no way to "undefine" a m
Le 06/11/2012 19:48, Peter Lemenkov a écrit :
> Hello All.
>
> 2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
>> For example, if we start from Fedora20 at beginning of 2014:
>> - Fedora20(jan 2014) is a stable release. (Fedora18 eol, actual way of
>> doing)
>> - Fedora21Preview(jul 2014) is an "unstable" release. (F
Hello
2012/11/6 Jason Brooks :
> For those who upgrade each release (or sooner), a 6mo life span for the
> latest release wouldn't matter. Those who don't want to upgrade every six
> months might well appreciate the two year life span.
They should pay for RHEL.
--
With best regards, Peter Lemenk
On 11/06/2012 10:34 AM, Matthieu Gautier wrote:
Hello all,
I'm not a Fedora developer, nor package maintainer. I'm a French Fedora
Ambassador for a long time. (I should say "I was" cause I don't do to
many things last time, just wake up every 6 months for Fedora releases
and other events).
I'm a
Hello All.
2012/11/6 Matthieu Gautier :
> For example, if we start from Fedora20 at beginning of 2014:
> - Fedora20(jan 2014) is a stable release. (Fedora18 eol, actual way of
> doing)
> - Fedora21Preview(jul 2014) is an "unstable" release. (Fedora 19 eol)
> - Fedora21(jan 2015) is a stable releas
Hello all,
I'm not a Fedora developer, nor package maintainer. I'm a French Fedora
Ambassador for a long time. (I should say "I was" cause I don't do to
many things last time, just wake up every 6 months for Fedora releases
and other events).
I'm also a developer but that's not about Fedora.
Whil
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 16:04:39 +0100,
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
When I do not react upon requests, I usually either missed or forgot
about the request or deliberately do not yet want to approve.
That said, what I feel is missing in Fedora's pkgdb web-forms is an
option to "leave a comment to
On 11/06/2012 04:32 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/06/2012 01:07 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
Oh no, you are top posting again ;-)
Could you create fesco ticket for this package? I proposed usage of
the script in Johann's ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/967#comment:7 Imho
On 11/06/2012 01:07 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
Oh no, you are top posting again ;-)
Could you create fesco ticket for this package? I proposed usage of
the script in Johann's ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/967#comment:7 Imho it might be
better to give acl to more people, then
On 11/06/2012 02:24 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 6.11.2012 14:17, Aleksandar Kurtakov napsal(a):
- Original Message -
From: "Vít Ondruch"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 2:56:18 PM
Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
So give me
Dne 6.11.2012 14:17, Aleksandar Kurtakov napsal(a):
- Original Message -
From: "Vít Ondruch"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 2:56:18 PM
Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
So give me the permission [1] as well as the others who
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 2:56:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
>
> So give me the permission [1] as well as the others who requested it
> before me.
>
> Apparently
On 11/06/2012 01:56 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
So give me the permission [1] as well as the others who requested it
before me.
Apparently the current owner doesn't care. You can compare the version
history in koji [2] and [3] and if he doesn't care about one package, it
is reasonable to doubt that t
So give me the permission [1] as well as the others who requested it
before me.
Apparently the current owner doesn't care. You can compare the version
history in koji [2] and [3] and if he doesn't care about one package, it
is reasonable to doubt that the other packages will be in better state
Compose started at Tue Nov 6 09:15:33 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[dhcp-forwarder]
dhcp-forwarder-upstart-0.10-1801.fc18.noarch requires /sbin/initctl
[dnf]
dnf-0.2.14-2.git4831982.fc18.noarch requires python-hawkey >=
Is it really that hard for you people to follow our mailing list
guidelines[1]?
JBG
1.https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines#If_You_Are_Replying_to_a_Message
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 22:52 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> all we would gain is a way to distinguish an offical
> build vs a scratch build in koji or a build someone did to mimic our
> environment.
I think what people mainly want here is a means to protect against
man-in-the-middle attacks between
I agree. I'd rather give people permission to co-maintain package, then
push them out of community. I'm afraid we can only loose maintainers by
measurements of activity.
Marcela
On 11/06/2012 12:10 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
It's the whole thread that implies that not your mail only.
No o
Dne 4.11.2012 10:31, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 11/04/2012 02:32 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- Autoqa could perhaps help out, but I am not holding my breath. ;)
Yeh, autoqa can't do a whole lot when its builds often intentionally
dependencies break (eg soname bumps). Unless such builds were re
Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting-1 for this important
meeting, wherein we shall determine the readiness of the Fedora 18 Beta.
Thursday, November 08, 2012 @19:00 UTC (14:00 EST/11:00 PST/20:00 CET)
"Before each public release Development, QA and Release Engineering meet
to determine
It's the whole thread that implies that not your mail only.
No one managed to explain why there should be actions against people instead of
packages. I would be really thankful if someone explains how he can getter
better measurement of people activity than of package maintenance problems and
w
I don't know what are you reading in my response, but I definitely did
not propose anything like "noone wants people that are ready to do one
thing in a year".
Vit
Dne 6.11.2012 09:52, Aleksandar Kurtakov napsal(a):
Where is the community spirit? What went wrong with fedora community? Why o
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 13:53:37 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> That's called CentOS,
> Nope ... CentOS/RHEL is a different end of extremes.
>
> 7 years+ life-time, no API changes, etc.
> What is lacking is a middle ground between "Fedora" and "CentOS".
>
> Something with a life-time of "~2 years",
On 6 November 2012 08:07, MANIK BAJPAI wrote:
> Hi,
> I have developed a small s390 (System z/mainframe) specific utility
> that allows the user to configure the stand-alone or a "VM" kind of dump.
> This is somewhat similar to system-config-kdump, but this is not a 'kdump'
> tool. I just wa
On 11/06/2012 05:35 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
On 2012-11-05 12:22, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/05/2012 07:52 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
A crit path update that affects, say, two packages and nothing else,
could be "approved by default" as well. Many of the crit path
features however
Where is the community spirit? What went wrong with fedora community? Why on
earth do you people insist on tracking people activity and not try detecting
unmaintained packages?
Detecting unmaintained packages is even easier and has clearer metrics.
Really, why noone wants people that are ready
Dne 5.11.2012 10:22, Marcela Mašláňová napsal(a):
On 11/02/2012 06:57 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmR
On 11/03/2012 08:27 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 09:41:05 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 09:29:07 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Hans and I have been having a problem uploading the source for the
new version of hegdewars to the lookaside cache. T
Hi,
I have developed a small s390 (System z/mainframe) specific
utility that allows the user to configure the stand-alone or a "VM" kind
of dump. This is somewhat similar to system-config-kdump, but this is
not a 'kdump' tool. I just wanted to know if I can contribute it as a
patch to th
46 matches
Mail list logo
