Re: Maybe it is time to move tools to Python 3.x?

W dniu 03.12.2014 o 20:30, Matthew Miller pisze: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 08:13:42PM +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: >> When I worked at Canonical there was a goal to move both internal and >> public tools to Python 3.x version. IIRC started somewhere around 12.04 >> and today when you look at Ub

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2014-12-04 17:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2014-12-04 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2014-12-04 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PST 2014-12-04 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EST 2014-12-04 1

karma and Bodhi elections

Hi, https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/firefox-34.0-1.fc20,thunderbird-31.3.0-1.fc20 are already to be push to stable without passing to test repo . But for what I see: "stable karma: 0" it shouldn't be pulled to stable even with karma 4 . I had an idea why not ? be possible, set in Bodhi r

[Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Final Release Candidate 5 (RC5) Available Now!

NOTE: Signing of the RC5 checksums is not yet complete. To be sure we're testing the right bits we should remember to check that the images we test match the signed checksum files once they're available, and of course you can carefully check the TLS certificate of the server when downloading the im

Nonresponsive maintainer (invalid email address): Chris Lockfort (clock...@redhat.com)

Through some series of accidents, the python-pyudev package in Fedora is assigned to clock...@redhat.com. This account has been closed since at least early 2013. The email address isn't "invalid" exactly in that emails won't bounce, but it is a black hole from which no responses will return, an

Heads up RabbitMQ users!

Hello All! I've removed SSLv3 from the list of supported crypto protocols in Erlang. This should apply only for cases where application doesn't define explicitly a list of supported protocols. E.g. if your package explicitly enables SSLv3 then it will be available, otherwise - won't be. The packag

Re: PVM: Retire or not to retire?

PVM in particular and high-performance computing in general are severely broken in most Linux distros and applications. First of all, there's licensing - the GPU folk, especially NVidia, aren't willing to back down as long as their intellectual property strategies are making them rich. For example,

Re: Maybe it is time to move tools to Python 3.x?

On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 08:13:42PM +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: > When I worked at Canonical there was a goal to move both internal and > public tools to Python 3.x version. IIRC started somewhere around 12.04 > and today when you look at Ubuntu Touch you will not find Python 2.7 > there. Simil

Maybe it is time to move tools to Python 3.x?

Hi Today I tried to use few Fedora tools and was greet with nice tracebacks when gave wrong arguments or something other happened. But that's not why I am writing. What surprised me more is that Fedora tools are still Python 2.x based. Someone may write "so what?" but I think that using legacy ve

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo meeting (2014-12-03 at 18UTC)

=== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2014-12-03) === Meeting started by nirik at 18:00:13 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-12-03/fesco.2014-12-03-18.00.log.html . Meeting summary

PVM: Retire or not to retire?

Is anyone going to scream if PVM get's retired? Upstream was last updated in 2009 as far as I can tell... It's packaging is atrocious... The source is copied to the buildroot and compiled in place... It violates the packaging guidelines in multiple bad ways... Also see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com

Re: Meeting minutes from Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2014-12-03)

> Action Items > > * bkabrda will ask java guys to create a wiki page summarizing the >approaches we thought of and why we think it's not worth the effort + >post the link to WG ML once it's ready Here it is: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mizdebsk/FedoraMavenRepository

Re: How many users does Fedora have?

On 02/12/14 18:12, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > On 2 December 2014 at 09:22, Matthew Miller > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 05:15:38PM +0100, jfm...@free.fr > wrote: > > Now it seems Fedora's downloads have been steadil

Meeting minutes from Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2014-12-03)

#fedora-meeting: Env and Stacks (2014-12-03) Meeting started by hhorak at 12:02:01 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-12-03/env-and-stacks.2014-12-03-12

rawhide report: 20141203 changes

Compose started at Wed Dec 3 05:15:02 UTC 2014 Broken deps for i386 -- [3Depict] 3Depict-0.0.16-3.fc22.i686 requires libmgl.so.7.2.0 [Sprog] Sprog-0.14-27.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.0) [cab] cab-0.1.

Re: How many users does Fedora have?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 3.12.2014 v 08:47 Michel Alexandre Salim napsal(a): > At the risk of jumping in, here's my own 2 cents on the subject... > > On 12/03/2014 12:30 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> >> >> On 2 December 2014 at 09:15, mailto:jfm...@free.fr>> wrote: >

F-21 Branched report: 20141203 changes

Compose started at Wed Dec 3 07:15:03 UTC 2014 Broken deps for armhfp -- [avro] avro-mapred-1.7.5-9.fc21.noarch requires hadoop-mapreduce avro-mapred-1.7.5-9.fc21.noarch requires hadoop-client [openstack-nova] openstac

[Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Final Release Candidate 4 (RC4) Available Now!

NOTE: Signing of the RC4 tree is not yet complete, there are technical issues in releng preventing it working. To strictly be sure we're testing the right bits we should remember to check that the images we test match the signed checksum files once they're available, and of course you can carefully