On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> On 01/08/17 01:01 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga
>> wrote:
>>> As a maintainer of Fedora Design Suite, the state of sparkleshare brought
>>> attention with these outstanding report:
>>> * h
On 01/08/17 01:01 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga
> wrote:
>> As a maintainer of Fedora Design Suite, the state of sparkleshare brought
>> attention with these outstanding report:
>> * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375789
>> * https://b
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 08:50:09PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Will the blockerbugs app start showing F28 blockers at the F27 branch
> > point? Or sometime later? From my point of view, the sooner the better.
> It tends to go wrong in various ways when you have multiple releases
> 'active' at
On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 21:18 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:16:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > quite meet what we aspire to. I do *NOT* propose to have any kind of
> > blocker tracking bug for the Basic release criteria; it doesn't seem to
> > fit in the process, th
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2017-08-04 16:00 UTC'
Links to all issues below ca
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 09:51:56AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > claims that the 'Completion deadline' "falls on the same day as the
> > Alpha milestone freeze", but the Fedora Release Life Cycle page -
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle - claims it
> > falls on the sam
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:16:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> quite meet what we aspire to. I do *NOT* propose to have any kind of
> blocker tracking bug for the Basic release criteria; it doesn't seem to
> fit in the process, there is no Alpha release to block, and we can't
> realistically bl
On 08/02/2017 05:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi, folks! So I've (finally) got ready an initial round of draft
> changes to various wiki pages for the purpose of implementing the 'No
> More Alphas' Change. You can find all the drafts in the NoMoreAlphas
> category:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 10:00:08PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Thanks for the web archive links. Unfortunately, they don't quantify the
> penalty, either. I'd feel more confident if I knew what it was (e.g.
> 10x slower or 1.1x slower?)
What I recall is it depended heavily on th
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:21:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> security@ and security-team@ have no meaningful activity in at least
> the last 6 months so I'm posting this here.
>
> grub2 incorrectly initialises the boot_params from the kernel image
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> security@ and security-team@ have no meaningful activity in at least
>>> the last 6 months so I'm posting this here.
>>
>> Have
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> security@ and security-team@ have no meaningful activity in at least
>> the last 6 months so I'm posting this here.
>
> Have you tried something as simple as reaching out to the maintai
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> security@ and security-team@ have no meaningful activity in at least
> the last 6 months so I'm posting this here.
Have you tried something as simple as reaching out to the maintainer of grub2?
> grub2 incorrectly initialises the boot_params
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:21:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> However, Fedora 24 didn't get the fix before going EOL. And Fedora 25
> and Rawhide both still have this problem. And I think it needs
> attention.
I suppose this is mildly pedantic since I'd be shocked if it makes any
difference here
On 08/03/2017 06:21 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> However, Fedora 24 didn't get the fix before going EOL. And Fedora 25
> and Rawhide both still have this problem. And I think it needs
> attention.
Does this really matter? The signed binaries are out there, and I don't
think we have revocation worki
security@ and security-team@ have no meaningful activity in at least
the last 6 months so I'm posting this here.
grub2 incorrectly initialises the boot_params from the kernel image
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1418360
The gist is that the bug means the kernel can't determine UEFI s
Good morning everyone,
We're now in the final sprint before Pagure over dist-git is a real thing. This
is a great time and we're very excited to see it happen.
However this change brings other changes with it which are detailed below.
Point of contact in bugzilla
Pkg
On 08/03/2017 05:41 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> Randy, can you please describe how it's going to change in terms of koji
> tags? How the (new) koji tags are going to be named, when packages enter
> them, when they leave them (including the -pending tags). Or is there a
> diagram somewhere? I'd like to
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 15:34:03 +0200
Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> Hello All!
> I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian
> arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER
> (ppc64 and ppc64le).
>
> So I have several questions.
>
> * Can I have a shell acc
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 14:37:47 +0100
Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 03/08/17 14:34, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
>
> > I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on
> > BigEndian arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the
> > tests on POWER (ppc64 and ppc64le).
> >
> > So I have several q
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:16:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi, folks! So I've (finally) got ready an initial round of draft
> changes to various wiki pages for the purpose of implementing the 'No
> More Alphas' Change. You can find all the drafts in the NoMoreAlphas
> category:
> https://fe
On 03/08/17 14:34, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian
arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER
(ppc64 and ppc64le).
So I have several questions.
* Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers bo
Hello All!
I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian
arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER
(ppc64 and ppc64le).
So I have several questions.
* Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers both
cases) where I can install pac
On 3 August 2017 at 14:07, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Well, the thing is you are looking at old data as far as I can tell,
> since this was fixed in the package several days ago [1].
The metadata builder got stuck, and I was at GUADEC for the last few
days. The new metadata should be uploaded to the sc
Le 27/07/2017 à 11:18, Reindl Harald a écrit :
> WTF - "Image Tragick" is still not fixed in Fedora?
> can someone please port php-pecl-imagick to GraphicsMagick
php-pecl-gmagick already exists ;)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
T
Dne 3.8.2017 v 13:43 Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> On 3 August 2017 at 12:15, Martin Gansser wrote:
>> Since this is add-on package, it should contain add-on metadata
>> This way, Gnome Software will be able to list this add-on side by side with
>> Nuvola player, which is pretty convenient.
> I d
On 3 August 2017 at 12:15, Martin Gansser wrote:
> Since this is add-on package, it should contain add-on metadata
> This way, Gnome Software will be able to list this add-on side by side with
> Nuvola player, which is pretty convenient.
I don't disagree, but where is
eu.tiliado.NuvolaAppAmazonC
Kevin Fenzi wrote on 08/01/2017 04:13 AM:
ok, I rebuilt the following ones. The ones with F next to them failed to
build:
F rubygem-rmagick-2.16.0-3.fc26.src.rpm
Fixed on rawhide.
Regards,
Mamoru
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
Vit told me to add a metinfo file [1]
Since this is add-on package, it should contain add-on metadata
This way, Gnome Software will be able to list this add-on side by side with
Nuvola player, which is pretty convenient.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455886#c1
Martin
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> This ceph build finished building in koji 12+ hours ago:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=942742
>
> but it still in f27-pending. Is there something stuck that prevents
> it going into f27, and thus inherited
On 3 August 2017 at 10:02, Martin Gansser wrote:
> The package contains a metainfo file [1] according to the fedora package
> guidelines [2], but doesn' t appear in the Gnome Software Center.
From
https://github.com/hughsie/createrepo_as_logs/blob/master/n/nuvola-app-amazon-cloud-player.log
:
On 3 August 2017 at 07:17, Vascom wrote:
> I'm don't know how correctly it is imported
> https://github.com/hughsie/createrepo_as_logs/blob/master/m/mediaconch.log
You're looking at the wrong file:
https://github.com/hughsie/createrepo_as_logs/blob/master/m/mediaconch-gui.log
This shows it's bei
This ceph build finished building in koji 12+ hours ago:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=942742
but it still in f27-pending. Is there something stuck that prevents
it going into f27, and thus inherited into f27-build ?
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o-
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Randy Barlow wrote:
> To necromance this old thread, I wanted to give a heads up that we're
> about to get a cool feature in Bodhi in response to this thread:
>
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/pull/1678
>
> With that pull request, there will be a new requ
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>> Because it is a short release, we should focus on a few key changes and
>>> otherwise limit scope as much as possible. From my perspective, the
>>> things we should focus on this time a
I have nearly the same problem with several addon applications for
nuvolaruntime e.g. nuvola-app-amazon-cloud-player.
The package contains a metainfo file [1] according to the fedora package
guidelines [2], but doesn' t appear in the Gnome Software Center.
[1]
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit
Thanks for your help. I undid the spec name change, and the package
builds again now.
I tried to change this name because the upstream author renamed the
published tar file on pypi after he moved his source code from
sourceforge to github, but the project name on github still is python-metar.
On
37 matches
Mail list logo
