On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:51 -0800, les wrote:
> Hi, Johan,
> No joy! Reboot then ran through the disk stuff, then a quick flash of
> something about grub in big text, then back to the small text and
> apparently the fine resolution screen. I could not trap the message
> screen despite seve
On 12/08/2012 06:07 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Arun SAG wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
If we want to solve this we need to release an Fedora LTS release for our
and the potential other user >base that don't hav
On 12/08/2012 12:07 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
Why does there need to be a long-term support for Fedora? Why not just
use Red Hat Enterprise Linux?
I imagine it boils down to money since Fedora=free and RHEL=$$$.
Corporate suits will will weigh cost of Fedora support vs RHEL support
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Arun SAG wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >If we want to solve this we need to release an Fedora LTS release for our
>> > and the potential other user >base that don't have to/want to update every
>> > 6
>> > o
On 12/06/2012 05:39 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
Are we talking about something like this:
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/471217-autotest/virt02.qa/rpmguard/results/libmemcached-1.0.14-.html
and this:
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/471217-autotest/virt02.qa/rpmguard/results/libmemcach
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:32 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
>
> >If we want to solve this we need to release an Fedora LTS release for our
> and the potential other user >base that don't have to/want to update every
> 6 or 12 months.
>
Completely agree on this one. In my day job we started us
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Final Test Compose 1 (TC1)
is now available for testing. Content information, including changes,
can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5406 . Please
see the following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and
testing instructi
On 12/07/2012 03:08 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
In the end if you are going to keep your machine secure et all you
have to keep it disconnected there will always be bugs which can be
exploited when you are network connected ;)
Smiley doesn't change the inane argument.
We don't with
On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 11:46:49 -0500, Ralph Bean wrote:
> > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
> > e.g.
> > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
> I introduced the switch-over as per this ticket
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedoracommunity/ticket/381
Waiting for fedorahosted.
On 12/07/2012 12:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>>> We could draw them between Core and Extras!
>> :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
>> bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a "Core" of their own a while back
Marcela Mašláňová (mmasl...@redhat.com) said:
> >You're using a Mac now, so good luck.
> >
> >But I'm pretty sure that software collections would not have helped
> >you to upgrade Libreoffice. Which, by the way, is possible without
> >upgrading everything: just compile the later SRPMs. In other
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 20:20 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 07:54 PM, les wrote:
>
> > Hi, everyone,
> > My name is Les Howell. I do semiconductor test programs for mainframe
> > ATE.
> >
> > My current issue is with GRUB2. I am slightly visually impaired due to
>
On 07.12.2012 14:08, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> On
12/07/2012 06:58 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
>> I do not care ab out
arguing with him, I care to give advice to others (if they care for my
advice, feel free to fully ignore). Don't follow that model, it's broken
security wise, unless you kee
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 20:20 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 07:54 PM, les wrote:
>
> > Hi, everyone,
> > My name is Les Howell. I do semiconductor test programs for mainframe
> > ATE.
> >
> > My current issue is with GRUB2. I am slightly visually impaired due to
>
On 12/07/2012 11:42 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> ext[234] has two boot sectors for a total of 1024 bytes. XFS has none. Btrfs
> has 64KB.
>
> It just seems like GRUB is a really familiar 4000 meter cargo train, compared
> to an unfamiliar hand truck, for the task of moving half-dozen boxes. Maybe
On 12/07/2012 07:54 PM, les wrote:
Hi, everyone,
My name is Les Howell. I do semiconductor test programs for mainframe
ATE.
My current issue is with GRUB2. I am slightly visually impaired due to
glaucoma. This is important, because setting my system up to use bigger
fonts is v
On 12/07/2012 06:58 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
I do not care ab out arguing with him, I care to give advice to others
(if they care for my advice, feel free to fully ignore).
Don't follow that model, it's broken security wise, unless you keep your
machine disconnected from the network.
In the end i
Hi, everyone,
My name is Les Howell. I do semiconductor test programs for mainframe
ATE.
My current issue is with GRUB2. I am slightly visually impaired due to
glaucoma. This is important, because setting my system up to use bigger
fonts is vital for me to use it. The problem I
On Dec 7, 2012, at 10:24 AM, "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:25:21PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Why is a boot manager needed for a virtualized guest? It seems like all you
>> need is to point to a virtual disk (or current or past snapshot) and go
>> directly to load
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 02:28:16PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 08:11:08PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > > * 960 - F18 schedule + the holidays (notting, 18:50:29)
> > > * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JaroslavReznik/FedupF18Final -
> > > not updated yet (jrezn
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 08:11:08PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > * 960 - F18 schedule + the holidays (notting, 18:50:29)
> > * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JaroslavReznik/FedupF18Final -
> > not updated yet (jreznik, 18:58:15)
> > * AGREED: Do not block on fedup signature checking (
> For example, making it so key applications and development stacks could
>> easily float from one base OS to the next would make it less of an issue
>> when the base OS needs to be upgraded.
>>
>
> Not sure I catch your drift here, but it sounds like it could cause API
> mismatch headaches.
>
>>
On 12/07/2012 07:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:49:25PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
My comment was simply on the "if you have both" part: it's not
really possible to have both without playing dirty tricks, so even
the "if" is pretty moot.
My point is that it's not re
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:20:14PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> * 960 - F18 schedule + the holidays (notting, 18:50:29)
> * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JaroslavReznik/FedupF18Final -
> not updated yet (jreznik, 18:58:15)
> * AGREED: Do not block on fedup signature checking (
On 12/07/2012 06:37 PM, Michael Scherer wrote:
While I cannot answer for Jóhann, I think a proposal could be to
contact for example QA, as some features will have a huge impact for
them. Contact irc support, as they may have some insight on the common
issue reported by people, etc.
We have a tr
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 18:13 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 04:59 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:47 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >> On 12/07/2012 03:51 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
>
On 07/12/12 17:48, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 03:11:31PM +, Andrew Price wrote:
Ah the ol' Fedora stability improvement thread. It must be Friday.
Ok, I'll bite.
This sort of conversation often comes and goes without much being
done. Usually it consists of debates between
Le vendredi 07 décembre 2012 à 18:22 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit :
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 04:51:43PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 12/07/2012 04:46 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > >On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> > > wrote:
> > >>>I am not sure why d
On 12/07/2012 05:22 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 04:51:43PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 12/07/2012 04:46 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and i
On 12/07/2012 04:59 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:47 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 12/07/2012 03:51 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
The unique and most impotant negative feedback I had it when I
upgraded a system from
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 01:53:50PM +0100, Tomas Radej wrote:
> community, I am seeking support for a movement, both collective and
> individual, that would improve communication, cooperation and generally
> the life of Fedora on the most fundamental basis.
In case it's not clear, I'm in. :)
--
M
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:49:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
> compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
> has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
> forever. If you wrote a p
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
> compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
> has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
> forever. If you wrote a program a
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:06:24AM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Do not call it "Feature Process" but "Planning process" - as it
> fits the decision to create F19 schedule after we know the scope
+1 to that!
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
devel mailing list
devel@lis
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:49:25PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> My comment was simply on the "if you have both" part: it's not
> really possible to have both without playing dirty tricks, so even
> the "if" is pretty moot.
My point is that it's not really possible to have *grub* without playing
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 09:29:28AM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
> > Yes, I think we're both trying to say the same thing: there's no point
> > having 'grub' in the repositories as its not installable or usable in
> > practise. The same goes for bunch of other obsoleted packages as well.
> yum is not t
commit fe03e0d9716bca30773921c5a4b40664adf49cac
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Dec 7 10:51:34 2012 -0700
update to 5.90019
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Catalyst-Runtime.spec | 12 +---
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletion
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:54:46AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> In my previous job, we were developing application for our internal
> customer. During development, we were free to use any library which
> suited our needs. However, in some point, our customer was satisfied
> with functionality he had
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 03:11:31PM +, Andrew Price wrote:
> Ah the ol' Fedora stability improvement thread. It must be Friday.
> Ok, I'll bite.
>
> This sort of conversation often comes and goes without much being
> done. Usually it consists of debates between three camps:
>
> 1. Those who se
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Miloslav Trmač [07/12/2012 18:07] :
>>
>> Advertising the feature on the _devel_ list is intended precisely to
>> get feedback from developers of other possibly affected components.
>
> IIRC, being subscribed to devel@ is not mandatory.
I
On 12/07/2012 09:56 AM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
Hi Ludwig,
In Ticket 507, that change did not help after all, and will probably
be removed.
It's hard to tell. I'm having some problems getting reliable reports.
We are working on that.
As far as I can tell, this is the only option we have f
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Catalyst-Runtime:
84491b1cde2052a2665e40e86cbc08be Catalyst-Runtime-5.90019.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.fedoraproj
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> > We could draw them between Core and Extras!
> :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
> bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a "Core" of their own a while back. Maybe
The bad idea was the insider-vs-outsider
On 12/07/2012 08:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Yes, I think we're both trying to say the same thing: there's no point having
> 'grub' in the repositories as its not installable or usable in practise. The
> same goes for bunch of other obsoleted packages as well.
yum is not the only tool avail
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:25:21PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Why is a boot manager needed for a virtualized guest? It seems like all you
> need is to point to a virtual disk (or current or past snapshot) and go
> directly to loading the kernel.
>
> If I could stuff < 1024 bytes of boot loade
* Miloslav Trmač [07/12/2012 18:07] :
>
> Advertising the feature on the _devel_ list is intended precisely to
> get feedback from developers of other possibly affected components.
IIRC, being subscribed to devel@ is not mandatory.
Emmanuel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
htt
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 04:51:43PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 04:46 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> > wrote:
> >>>I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and impact, when it
> >>>will be autocategorize
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 02:08:28AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> I don't think I fully understand your question here. Every SCL is confined
> in its own root under /opt/.../name/root. So you can either do two SCLs,
^^^
Or wherever we decide is the appropriate place -- I t
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:47 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 03:51 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
> >> The unique and most impotant negative feedback I had it when I
> >> upgraded a system from Fedora 14 to 15, that was the
Hi,
On 12/07/2012 05:56 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
Hi Ludwig,
In Ticket 507, that change did not help after all, and will probably
be removed.
As far as I can tell, this is the only option we have for ticket 509.
yes, but the subject says lock free. So if we cannot make it lock free
is it just
Hi Ludwig,
In Ticket 507, that change did not help after all, and will probably be
removed.
As far as I can tell, this is the only option we have for ticket 509.
Mark
On 12/07/2012 11:50 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi Mark,
for ticket 507 you replaced rw locks with mutex locks, now for the
On 12/07/2012 04:46 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and impact, when it
will be autocategorized by feedback on ML.
It's common knowledge that you cant autocategorized by feedback on
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:25:21PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:02 PM, "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >> The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
> >> older package, but i
Hi Mark,
for ticket 507 you replaced rw locks with mutex locks, now for the
backend you replace mutex locks with rw locks ? any reason why these are
better here ?
Regards,
Ludwig
On 12/07/2012 05:48 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/509
https://fedorahosted.org/3
On 12/07/2012 03:51 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
The unique and most impotant negative feedback I had it when I
upgraded a system from Fedora 14 to 15, that was the upgrade from
Gnome 2 to Gnome 3.
…
Fedora community should test big transitions
On 12/07/2012 05:26 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:56:44AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I haven't experienced this with F16, F17 or so far F18. What I'm seeing is:
yum install/update grub gets me grub legacy.
yum install/update grub-efi gets me grub legacy efi.
yum instal
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/509
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/509/0001-Ticket-509-lock-free-access-to-be-be_suffixlock.patch
--
Mark Reynolds
Red Hat, Inc
mreyno...@redhat.com
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
commit c45de9c3338d3cfdbdf5eef4c21daad9103b5b33
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Dec 7 09:47:37 2012 -0700
update to 1.08
.gitignore |1 +
perl-System-Command.spec |8 +---
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
---
diff
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 04:57:00PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> There used to be
>
> http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
> e.g.
> http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
>
> Whoever has installed the new non-working software on that server,
> could it be replaced with the
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:13 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
>> I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and impact, when it
>> will be autocategorized by feedback on ML.
>
> It's common knowledge that you cant autocategorized by feedback on Mailing
> list regardless what's it's f
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-System-Command:
cae18b739ddd6dea8fe830dd6aae878f System-Command-1.08.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
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
> >> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >>> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three things:
>
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:54:07PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 08:42 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> > In fact in some area it takes me 1 min to finish loading the
> > page..
>
> Bugzilla has been veeery slow for the last week or two. Painfully slow.
> Incredibly ef
On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations wh
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> 3) It's the ecosystem. If using Software Collections on RHEL is good for
>your company, it's good for it to work on Fedora, because a) we're the
>upstream and problems get worked out here, b) development resources
>benefit Fedora
There used to be
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
e.g.
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
Whoever has installed the new non-working software on that server,
could it be replaced with the previous version again, please?
The pages don't want to load successfully anymor
commit 7a3f13db18f976f794bbba533a4cb4d9a2ff0ca9
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Dec 7 08:51:01 2012 -0700
update to 2.76
.gitignore|1 +
perl-autobox.spec |8 +---
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
> The unique and most impotant negative feedback I had it when I
> upgraded a system from Fedora 14 to 15, that was the upgrade from
> Gnome 2 to Gnome 3.
> …
> Fedora community should test big transitions like Gnome 2->3 for a
> longer period o
On 12/07/2012 03:11 PM, Andrew Price wrote:
Ah the ol' Fedora stability improvement thread. It must be Friday. Ok,
I'll bite.
This sort of conversation often comes and goes without much being
done. Usually it consists of debates between three camps:
1. Those who see Fedora as an intrinsicall
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
>
>> I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
>> but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
>> them...
>
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/1
commit 73102a0a4c16848c1bc175db0df7e430eda2869f
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Dec 7 08:34:36 2012 -0700
update to 1.004004
.gitignore |1 +
perl-strictures.spec |5 -
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.g
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885146
Bug ID: 885146
Summary: perl-Module-Build should not BR: perl(YAML::Tiny)
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Module-Build
Severity: unspecified
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-strictures:
1a6323eee9f2c9762a77b97e604034d4 strictures-1.004004.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/mai
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:56:44AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >>I haven't experienced this with F16, F17 or so far F18. What I'm seeing is:
> >>
> >>yum install/update grub gets me grub legacy.
> >>yum install/update grub-efi gets me grub legacy efi.
> >>yum install/update grub2 gets me grub2.
Ah the ol' Fedora stability improvement thread. It must be Friday. Ok,
I'll bite.
This sort of conversation often comes and goes without much being done.
Usually it consists of debates between three camps:
1. Those who see Fedora as an intrinsically unstable distro which
showcases and attrac
HI Ludwig,
We only call emergency logging if we can't write to the log or rename
it. The server will shutdown once we can't write to the log - that's
why we need to log a reason(if possible).
Mark
On 12/07/2012 04:13 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi Mark,
the fix is ok to avoid the stack ove
Hi, I've got a few packages I'd like to get through review and will swap
reviews with anybody to do so.
qpid-proton
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874105
rubygem-bicho
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836368
rubygem-inifile
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8742
Dne 7.12.2012 15:06, Jaroslav Reznik napsal(a):
- Original Message -
It doesn't matter from a "get this thing into Fedora" standpoint. It
very much matters from a marketing/communication standpoint. If it
didn't matter, Fedora Marketing wouldn't be picking specific items
out
of the ove
Il 07/12/2012 13:53, Tomas Radej ha scritto:
> Hi everybody.
>
> [...]
> A Fedora contributor, Tomas Radej
>
>From the moment I started using Fedora to now, I installed it on 41
different machines of different owners. The unique and most impotant
negative feedback I had it when I upgraded a system
- Original Message -
> It doesn't matter from a "get this thing into Fedora" standpoint. It
> very much matters from a marketing/communication standpoint. If it
> didn't matter, Fedora Marketing wouldn't be picking specific items
> out
> of the overall Feature list.
>
> The example I use
Compose started at Fri Dec 7 09:15:42 UTC 2012
New package: libnetfilter_cthelper-1.0.0-3.fc18
User-space infrastructure for connection tracking helpers
New package: peervpn-0.029-1.fc18
A VPN software using full mesh network topology
Updated Packages:
NetworkM
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>>
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three thing
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>>
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three thing
On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/06/2012 09:26 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> BTW the new fedora-packages webapp is much slower and less usable
> than the old pkgdb one for me, I'd personally prefer it to be
> switched back until the bugs like the above have been sorted out
> and th
On 12/07/2012 12:53 PM, Tomas Radej wrote:
Hi everybody.
Disclaimer: This mail is written from the position of a Fedora
community member. Red Hat has nothing to do with this.
I don't want to start yet another rant saying that everything is broken
and we'd be better off if we aped Debian. Absolu
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> Alternately, "Feature" could be the term for the any small or big thing
>>> which is useful to track and tout for marketing purposes, and big
>>> technical
>>> changes could be, I dunno... "Major Changes".
>>
>> The meeting minutes showed that
On 12/07/2012 11:13 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 7.12.2012 11:13, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" napsal(a):
On 12/07/2012 09:28 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Feature is something somebody considers important enough to create
feature page for it. Period.
That describes the current state and is your point of
Hi everybody.
Disclaimer: This mail is written from the position of a Fedora
community member. Red Hat has nothing to do with this.
I don't want to start yet another rant saying that everything is broken
and we'd be better off if we aped Debian. Absolutely not. I don't want
to put blame on someon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/07/2012 01:46 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 12:53 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> In bohdi, people have reported that -59 fixed the problem going forward.
>> But people already affected need to relabel.
>
> Looks like I got cau
Dne 7.12.2012 11:13, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" napsal(a):
On 12/07/2012 09:28 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Feature is something somebody considers important enough to create
feature page for it. Period.
That describes the current state and is your point of view.
To me an "Feature" is a completely d
- Original Message -
> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 10:28 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 6.12.2012 21:40, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
> > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Miller
> > > wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >>> As I said in the meeting
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 10:28 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 6.12.2012 21:40, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
> > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Miller
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>> As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a
On 12/07/2012 09:28 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Feature is something somebody considers important enough to create
feature page for it. Period.
That describes the current state and is your point of view.
To me an "Feature" is a completely different thing.
I am not sure why do you want to categ
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 11:54:46 AM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan
Fernando Nasser a écrit:
> And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
>
> The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of
> maintenance.
Please, avoiding top-posting like this would be very welcome here.
Otherwise, it is quite hard to know what you are replying to exactly.
Th
Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer
versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available
in the
core system and make sure system packages and collectio
Dne 6.12.2012 21:40, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a Feature
needs to be cleared up before we can really tackle this one. Fea
Dne 6.12.2012 18:23, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Also, there was dissent already in the "auto-approving" of leaf-features
during the meeting discussion so I am not sure that auto-accepting of
Features in general given a lack of response is ever goin
On 12/06/2012 05:08 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
the current dependency model is t
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
