David Woodhouse wrote:
> Our packaging guidelines really ought to mandate that *if* upstream
> publishes GPG or PKCS#7/CMS signatures of source tarballs, then the
^
and if the upstream tarball can legally be redistributed as is
> package *m
Tomas Popela wrote:
> Why do you think that Tom has to look at the qt5-qtwebengine package
> when that package reuses our stuff from Chromium packaging?
Because I have additional changes that the Chromium packaging does not have,
or at least did not have last I checked?
I have at least:
* update
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:38:09 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
> wrote:
> > Josh Boyer wrote:
> >
> >> There is no need to call this ridiculous or nonsense. There have
> >> been valid reasons brought up in this very thread for being
> >> somewha
> My understanding is that wille was renamed to sopel. Do we have a
> process for dealing with those kinds of changes?
If you're talking about to keep the upgrade path intact, propably:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
--
devel mailing list
> I've orphaned willie package cause upstream is dead.
…
> It's suggested to use sopel instead, it's not yet packaged.
> https://github.com/sopel-irc/sopel
To be fully right, I decided to directly retire the package, cause upstream is
definitely dead, at least with the old name willie.
--
devel m
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Raphael Groner
wrote:
> I've orphaned willie package cause upstream is dead.
>
> I can not fix bug #1138618 for several reasons:
> new tarball from pypi with new version 5.5.1 maybe but that tarball misses
> - COPYING (was available in 4.5.0) though no idea how to
I've orphaned willie package cause upstream is dead.
I can not fix bug #1138618 for several reasons:
new tarball from pypi with new version 5.5.1 maybe but that tarball misses
- COPYING (was available in 4.5.0) though no idea how to handle EFL in such a
case
- docs (was available in 4.5.0) though
Hi
Starting with qt-creator 4.0.0-beta1 (landing in rawhide very soon),
qt-creator will be licensed GPLv3 with exceptions. Previous releases
were LGPLv2 with exceptions or LGPLv3 with exceptions. See also [1].
Sandro
[1] http://blog.qt.io/blog/2016/03/23/qt-creator-4-0-beta-released/
--
deve
Dear all,
Packagers, members of the fedorabugs group and people having a 'watchbugzilla'
ACL in pkgdb must have a bugzilla account attached to the email they set in the
Fedora Account System (FAS).
This is mandatory to allow ACLs to be propagated from pkgdb to bugzilla,
allowing
the right person
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 1:26 PM Timotheus Pokorra <
timotheus.poko...@solidcharity.com> wrote:
> Hello Christopher,
>
> please check [1] if your bug has been reported already.
> Or report new bugs at [2], and hopefully the maintainers (see list at
> [3]) should reply on the bugs.
>
> Timotheus
>
>
Is the recent Appstream guideline for fonts [1] applicable for Gnome
Software?
While reading it for preparing the metainfo.xml, I noticed these
following lines:
For fonts, the |%{id}|must be the name of the font or font bundle
without whitespaces, and must be suffixed with |.font|.
Can "
Hello Christopher,
please check [1] if your bug has been reported already.
Or report new bugs at [2], and hopefully the maintainers (see list at
[3]) should reply on the bugs.
Timotheus
[1]: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/xrdp/bugs
[2]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com
[3]: https://admin.fed
Hi everyone,
I would like to announce the release of blivet-2.0.0[1]. See the
release notes[2] for information about all of the changes in this
version and the documentation[3] for the public API specification.
Some of the larger changes:
- full PEP8 compliance
- thread-safety
- added support
Hi, I sent a message to the users@ list[1] about XRDP, and didn't get a
response. I'm curious what's the status of XRDP in Fedora. I tried to get
it to work in the AWS cloud image for Fedora 23, and it didn't work (could
authenticate, but it couldn't start vnc/gnome, but couldn't figure out
why). I
Hello,
On 03/22/2016 09:47 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 06:01:14PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote:
Hi,
I am in the process of splitting the 'tc' utility off from iproute
package. The motivation for this comes from two things:
1) Due to it's xt/ipt action, tc depend
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:28:45AM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Our packaging guidelines really ought to mandate that *if* upstream
> > publishes GPG or PKCS#7/CMS signatures of source tarballs, then the
> > package *must* verify those signatures as part of %prep.
>
> I
Dear all,
I'm orphaning the package pyicq-t in all branches. The last upstream
release was at the end of 2009.
Best wishes,
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Ok, I will prepare libgit2 and related packages update in one week for f24.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:39 PM Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/22/2016 01:29 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:46:58PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> >> On 03/21/2016 07:28 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
David Woodhouse wrote:
> Our packaging guidelines really ought to mandate that *if* upstream
> publishes GPG or PKCS#7/CMS signatures of source tarballs, then the
> package *must* verify those signatures as part of %prep.
I just thought of something that shouldn't be forgotten: How would this
affe
19 matches
Mail list logo
