Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 12/18/2017 03:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Does anyone read this as Mozilla admitting that they messed up? This was published today: https://blog.mozilla.org/firefox/update-looking-glass-add/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > Can you point out to me which part indicates that Mozilla admits that they > made a mistake. Sounds to me like they're just blaming the dumb users for > not understanding how wonderful was "the experience [they]

[Bug 1527235] New: perl-App-Cme-1.026 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1527235 Bug ID: 1527235 Summary: perl-App-Cme-1.026 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-App-Cme Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 1016 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 778 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 360

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Gerald B. Cox writes: Everyone makes mistakes - this wasn't the first by Mozilla and won't be the last.  I don't believe they are acting out of malice.  As long as they admit and correct mistakes as they go along that is fine with me. Here's the most complete statement from Mozilla that I

[Bug 1521155] _version_check gives unhelpful advice

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1521155 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Dancer2-0.204004-3.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > IMHO requesting support for a build flag to disable this ability to > remotely push executable code out to user's browser is not unreasonable, I agree. There should be a single, properly documented build-time option to disable all current and future features that

[Bug 1526665] perl-PPI-XS-0.910 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526665 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-PPI-XS-0.910-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Chris Adams wrote: > Are > there any other packages that can silently download and run non-Fedora > code? The other web browsers. They'll silently download and run Javascript code from pretty much every website. It's a crazy dangerous practice, but that genie isn't going to go back into the

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

- Mail original - De: "Adam Williamson" > My mail is based on a belief that Mozilla is still one of the better > actors we have to work with in the category of desktop browser > suppliers, Adam, I agree it's still one of the better actors, but the better actor bar keeps lowering

[Bug 1521155] _version_check gives unhelpful advice

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1521155 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1526665] perl-PPI-XS-0.910 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526665 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1524390] perl-Net-GitHub-0.91 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1524390 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity Office Hours

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity Office Hours on 2017-12-19 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At https://meet.jit.si/fedora-modularity The meeting will be about: This is where you ask the Fedora Modularity Team questions (and we try to answer them)! Join us

Re: Bullet 2.87 coming to rawhide

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Rich Mattes wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm planning on updating bullet to 2.87 in rawhide over the weekend. > The following packages are affected: > > $ dnf repoquery --source --alldeps --whatrequires "bullet*" > Last metadata expiration check:

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Florian Weimer wrote: > On 12/18/2017 08:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > I don't remember being actively asked about such data collection, and > > I've recently installed on a clean system, nightly on Fedora, and then > > final releases of 57 on Windows and macOS. Does anyone have a screen > > shot

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 22:36 +0100, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: > Is it surprising that the Mozilla foundation, that decided long ago > that users were idiots that didn't know what they wanted, and > reoriented itself to serve the cloud industry I don't share this opinion at all. If Fedora

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Adam Williamson wrote: > since then, a new sub-preference seems to have appeared, labelled > 'Allow Firefox to install and run studies'. In the Swedish translation the sub-preference doesn't even exist. There is no second checkbox under the translation of "Allow Firefox to send technical and

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Again, this is something I covered in my original mail. We distribute > Firefox as the default browser to a large number of people who trust us > to provide them with software. This gives us both a

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

De: "Adam Williamson" > I think we should be concerned by this kind of behaviour on the part of > the supplier of our default desktop browser, and we should express that > concern to them. Adam, We should understand that there is a whole software ecosystem that grew on the Internet and free

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 12/18/2017 09:59 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: Everyone makes mistakes - this wasn't the first by Mozilla and won't be the last. I don't believe they are acting out of malice. Of course not. But at some level, there is a deception involved: Mozilla present a strong privacy focus for Firefox,

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 12:59 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > > The only reason we are beating a dead horse is because you keep > > > telling us that we shouldn't have beaten a dead horse in a way that

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Adam Williamson < adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > The only reason we are beating a dead horse is because you keep > > telling us that we shouldn't have beaten a dead horse in a way that > > requires us to explain why we are doing so. Look we understand..

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 15:48 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 18 December 2017 at 15:42, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > > > And in any case, a tie-in with a television-show related game is > > > clearly neither telemetry nor some kind of user interaction study. Yet > > > to me,

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 18 December 2017 at 15:42, Gerald B. Cox wrote: >> And in any case, a tie-in with a television-show related game is >> clearly neither telemetry nor some kind of user interaction study. Yet >> to me, Mozilla's response does not seem to convey understanding of this >> at all. It

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Chris Adams wrote: > the requires downloads to be useful. I think simply requiring Mozilla > to change their policies is unacceptable, as this still depends on a > third party to properly enforce such policies (and not have any security > issue that could result in untrusted

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Adam Williamson < adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 20:52 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > So I just booted Firefox 27 Workstation live and opened Firefox. > Indeed, a pop-under tab appears with this URL (so you can close it > without

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 20:52 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 12/18/2017 08:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > I don't remember being actively asked about such data collection, and > > I've recently installed on a clean system, nightly on Fedora, and then > > final releases of 57 on Windows and macOS.

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Gerald B. Cox said: > > First of all, when you install Fx, it asks you specifically if you want > to > > participate in Fx Data Collection - you can opt out at that point. > > AFAIK, not

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Once upon a time, Gerald B. Cox said: > First of all, when you install Fx, it asks you specifically if you want to > participate in Fx Data Collection - you can opt out at that point. AFAIK, not when you install from an RPM. -- Chris Adams

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 12/18/2017 08:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: I don't remember being actively asked about such data collection, and I've recently installed on a clean system, nightly on Fedora, and then final releases of 57 on Windows and macOS. Does anyone have a screen shot or description of what this "ask"

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 11:09 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: >> >> First of all, when you install Fx, it asks you specifically if you want to >> participate in Fx Data Collection - you can opt out at that point. > >

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Adam Williamson < adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 11:09 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > > > First of all, when you install Fx, it asks you specifically if you want > to > > participate in Fx Data Collection - you can opt out at that

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 11:09 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > First of all, when you install Fx, it asks you specifically if you want to > participate in Fx Data Collection - you can opt out at that point. Well, not quite. I installed Firefox rather a long time ago on this system. Again I can't

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > Additionally, can we turn the "Allow firefox to install and run studies" > preference to off/false by default in Fedora packages. It seems odd that > this is now opt-out. > > I don't know. I personally tend to side with

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:42:17AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 12:34 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > > Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said: > > > As part of a tie-in with an American TV show, Mozilla thought it'd be a > > > great idea to

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:34:46PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said: > > As part of a tie-in with an American TV show, Mozilla thought it'd be a > > great idea to silently install a cryptically-named addon in all(?) > > Firefox

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said: > Well, practically speaking we do have to have *some* degree of trust in > our suppliers for apps as large and complex as a web browser or, say, > an office app. True, but I do think there's a difference between trusting code

[Bug 1504429] perl-Term-Table-0.012 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1504429 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Term-Table-0.012-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 12:34 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said: > > As part of a tie-in with an American TV show, Mozilla thought it'd be a > > great idea to silently install a cryptically-named addon in all(?) > > Firefox deployments.

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 12/18/2017 07:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: Sure. A new release coming out affords many people in the pipeline many chances to notice changes in it. The packager has the opportunity to notice significant changes while updating the package. Users of updates-testing have the opportunity to

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 12/18/2017 09:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: ...snip... > > “Our goal with the custom experience we created with Mr. Robot was to > engage our users in a fun and unique way,” a Mozilla representative > said in a statement. “Real engagement also means listening to feedback. > And so while the

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said: > As part of a tie-in with an American TV show, Mozilla thought it'd be a > great idea to silently install a cryptically-named addon in all(?) > Firefox deployments. Which can't be turned off. I thought that this was actually a

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 13:08 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 09:55:26AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I think we should be concerned by this kind of behaviour on the part of > > the supplier of our default desktop browser, and we should express that > > concern to them.

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On 18 December 2017 at 13:08, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 09:55:26AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> I think we should be concerned by this kind of behaviour on the part of >> the supplier of our default desktop browser, and we should express that >>

Re: Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 09:55:26AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > I think we should be concerned by this kind of behaviour on the part of > the supplier of our default desktop browser, and we should express that > concern to them. Assuming Fedora-as-a-project shares my concern, do we > have a

Firefox "Looking Glass" fiasco

So in case you haven't heard of it (or noticed about it), there was a kerfuffle in Firefox land recently about this: https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/16/16784628/mozilla-mr-robot-arg-plugin-firefox-looking-glass As part of a tie-in with an American TV show, Mozilla thought it'd be a great idea

Re: MASS CHANGE announcement: python2- prefix renaming, part 2

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:06:35PM +0100, Iryna Shcherbina wrote: > Hi, > > if the timing is not good, then I can take the generated patch set > and turn it into Pagure Pull Requests with a script. Packagers would > be able to review/merge them during the holidays and we can merge > the rest on

Re: Introducing myself to Fedora

- Original Message - > From: "Spyros Trigazis" > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Cc: "Dusty Mabe" > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 11:37:30 PM > Subject: Introducing myself to Fedora > > > > Hello Fedora Developers, > > I

[EPEL-devel] Re: updating SuperLU on EL-7 and EL-6

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 01:40:12PM +1000, Conrad Sand wrote: > RHEL6 does have some use within a few Fortune 500 companies for > running existing backend infrastructure. The type of infrastructure > that is meant to be "set-and-forget", modulo security updates. > > However, as a general

Re: wrong selinux label on user-1000.journal, AVC denials

On 12/16/2017 12:04 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: Fedora 27 workstation. I'm getting selinux AVC denial messages in the journal as a result of user-1000.journal having label system_u:object_r:unlabeled_t:s0. It's the only log file with that label, the other files and the directory its in have

Re: Introducing myself to Fedora

On 12/16/2017 05:37 PM, Spyros Trigazis wrote: > Hello Fedora Developers, > > I would like to join the packagers group and I am sending you > this email to introduce myself. > > My name is Spyros Trigazis and I'm currently working for the CERN [1] > Cloud Infrastructure team [2]. More

Re: MASS CHANGE announcement: python2- prefix renaming, part 2

Hi, if the timing is not good, then I can take the generated patch set and turn it into Pagure Pull Requests with a script. Packagers would be able to review/merge them during the holidays and we can merge the rest on January 2nd. This is just a suggestion, let me know if it sounds like an

Fedora Rawhide-20171218.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Server boot x86_64 Server dvd i386 Workstation live i386 Server dvd x86_64 Server boot i386 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 51/106 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20171217.n.0): ID: 180966 Test: x86_64 universal

Re: MASS CHANGE announcement: python2- prefix renaming, part 2

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 01:05:03PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 3:16 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < > zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > > > Dear fellow Fedora developers, > > > > I plan to execute part 2 of the renaming. First part was announced and > > discussed here

Re: MASS CHANGE announcement: python2- prefix renaming, part 2

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 3:16 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > Dear fellow Fedora developers, > > I plan to execute part 2 of the renaming. First part was announced and > discussed here [1]. Recently, Iryna Shcherbina announced [2] plans for > a follow up: changing the

Re: Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: Forge-hosted projects packaging automation

Hi, > 4. There is a bug in EL7 that causes spectool not to process the resulting > files. rpmbuild and mock work fine though. I > added a -i switch to the macro that prints the resolved source url, you can > then dump it in curl, wget or whatever in EL7. > Alternatively, get someone to fix the

pghmcfc pushed to perl-MCE-Shared (master). "Update to 1.834 (..more)"

From 05cce7a67fa459404710d28b2d01f9dabcf777c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Howarth Date: Dec 18 2017 10:45:51 + Subject: Update to 1.834 - New upstream release 1.834 - Fixed croak handling inside MCE::Shared::Server - Enhanced sequence (bounds_only) to return

[Bug 1526776] perlbrew-0.82 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526776 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

[Bug 1526665] perl-PPI-XS-0.910 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526665 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-PPI-XS-0.910-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a19ecb8240 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1526665] perl-PPI-XS-0.910 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526665 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-PPI-XS-0.910-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-155263b957 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1526665] perl-PPI-XS-0.910 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526665 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In