https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/01/29/report-389-ds-base-1.4.3.2-20200129git8a3cea6.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Hi Fabio,
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:42 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> I'll take a look at your review requests. I've been steeping in Java
> packaging for so long that I might as well do it ;)
Thank you! I'm glad to have your expert eye take a look.
> I'll have some simple packages for you to
Hi,
I have a simple package for review. It's called practrand - a Software
package for the Randon number generation & testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461
I offer to review some simple package in return.
Thanks!
Jirka
___
devel
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:12 PM Stasiek Michalski wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 23:57, Dan Čermák
> wrote:
> > Neal Gompa writes:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:27 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 09:54:59PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>> > On
On Tuesday, 28 January 2020 10:03:09 CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> * committing to git should build the package
>
> Is there a reason why this wouldn't be the case?
Please no. Sometimes you just fix a typo or add a comment and there's no need
to rebuild until a next release.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 22:06 Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> >
> > This thread is serving as a source of requirements (although it has
> meandered dramatically away from that)
>
> When I first read the post, my thought was: wow, what a convoluted and
>
Neal Gompa writes:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:27 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 09:54:59PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > The release field would need to be set by koji ignoring
"Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you have to write your own automation. Could we
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:58, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
> This thread is serving as a source of requirements (although it has meandered
> dramatically away from that)
When I first read the post, my thought was: wow, what a convoluted and
abstruse way of saying "we want to abandon Pagure". Probably
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Latest CVE there has a backported fix applied to fedora's packaging, and
>> is currently in bodhi updates-testing,
>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-9139ba5469
>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e9b85978d4
>
>
Rex Dieter wrote:
> Latest CVE there has a backported fix applied to fedora's packaging, and
> is currently in bodhi updates-testing,
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-9139ba5469
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e9b85978d4
But that's only QtBase.
Stephen John Smoogen writes:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>>
>> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
>>
>> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
>> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
>> > maintain 100+ (things
Latest CVE there has a backported fix applied to fedora's packaging, and is
currently in bodhi updates-testing,
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-9139ba5469
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e9b85978d4
___
devel
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 15:58 Adam Saleh wrote:
> Way we were discussing this, I think there were several points I didn't
> really see here.
>
> a) we are gathering requirements for Git Forge, but we need a good Dist
> Git as well.
>
> There might be difference in requirements and tooling for Dist
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795761
Bug ID: 1795761
Summary: perl-Devel-PatchPerl-1.84 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Devel-PatchPerl
Keywords: FutureFeature,
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:39 PM Randy Barlow
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 09:03 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > If you want to go even further with this idea, then it could even be
> > possible we allow packages into Fedora without any review. They
> > would
> > start in the outermost
On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 09:03 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> If you want to go even further with this idea, then it could even be
> possible we allow packages into Fedora without any review. They
> would
> start in the outermost stream in a "there be dragons" repository that
> only the
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 14:01, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>
> * Stephen John Smoogen [28/01/2020 13:08] :
> >
> > You are assuming that maintainers actually check to see if a version
> > fixes an issue already. If a packager has 100's or 1000's of
> > packages.. there is no way they will have done so
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795754
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Clipboard-0.22-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41150757
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795755
Bug ID: 1795755
Summary: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Fedora-0.2.2 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-CPANPLUS-Dist-Fedora
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795754
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1656082
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1656082=edit
[patch] Update to 0.22 (#1795754)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795754
Bug ID: 1795754
Summary: perl-Clipboard-0.22 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Clipboard
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795727
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:49, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:08:11PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > >
> > > "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> > >
> > > > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795690
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
* Stephen John Smoogen [28/01/2020 13:08] :
>
> You are assuming that maintainers actually check to see if a version
> fixes an issue already. If a packager has 100's or 1000's of
> packages.. there is no way they will have done so except on a 1 in a
> million case set. I think if are going to aim
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795691
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:08:11PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> >
> > "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> >
> > > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work.
Hi,
There are currently 4 issues which prevent to build the Python package
on Fedora Rawhide: Python 3.8.1 and Python 3.9.0a3 packages are
impacted, at least.
My Python 3.9.0a3 PR:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python39/pull-request/16
Example of Python 3.8.1 PR with failing tests:
This is more a request to ship secure versions of software in fedora and
rhel that don't have open CVE's when fixed versions are available
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, 19:21 Artem Tim, wrote:
> Request 768036 (accepted)
> Qt 5.14.1 - untested, as usual
> https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/768036
>
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>
> "Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
>
> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> > maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 12:17, Martin Kolman wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2020-01-22 at 13:28 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:58 PM Milan Crha wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2020-01-22 at 11:37 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > > they all picked GitLab CE.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Co on 2020-01-29 from 18:00:00 to 19:00:00 GMT
At freenode@fedora-meeting
The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting. A general agenda is the
following:
#meetingname EPEL
#topic
"Richard W.M. Jones" writes:
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you have to write your own automation. Could we
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795727
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Error-0.17029-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41145679
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795727
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1656057
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1656057=edit
[patch] Update to 0.17029 (#1795727)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795727
Bug ID: 1795727
Summary: perl-Error-0.17029 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Error
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Request 768036 (accepted)
Qt 5.14.1 - untested, as usual
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/768036
That is all we need to know about how packages updating in openSUSE or
something else?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On Wed, 2020-01-22 at 13:28 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:58 PM Milan Crha wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-01-22 at 11:37 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > they all picked GitLab CE.
> >
> > Hi,
> > I do not want to pollute this thread with unrelated information,
> >
As mentioned in:
https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-5.14.1-released
https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020
Qt 5.14.1 seems to be the only available Qt version
that contains various security fixes for CVE's, after Qt's recent switch of
patch handling
(for open source only the latest version
It would be nice if you could look into existing code instead of writing
new one: https://github.com/ignatenkobrain/git-rpm-changelog
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 12:43 Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:03:09AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > I always think that Fedora works
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1790410
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795690
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
An unexpected error occurred while creating the scratch build and has been
automatically reported. Sorry!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795691
Bug ID: 1795691
Summary: perl-File-Find-Object-0.3.5 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-File-Find-Object
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795690
Bug ID: 1795690
Summary: perl-File-Find-Object-Rule-0.0312 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-File-Find-Object-Rule
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795691
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
An unexpected error occurred while creating the scratch build and has been
automatically reported. Sorry!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Way we were discussing this, I think there were several points I didn't
really see here.
a) we are gathering requirements for Git Forge, but we need a good Dist Git
as well.
There might be difference in requirements and tooling for Dist Git compared
to generic fully featured Git Forge.
It might
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:59 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:51:28PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> >
> > >> Sorry for being unclear. The spec file in dist-git would still show
> > >> some (older) version of the %changelog entries under this
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:24:44AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 28-01-2020 10:37, Vascom wrote:
> > Are s390x builders ready for Mass Rebuild?
> > I see many fail builds only on s390x without logs.
>
> I was about to ask the same thing, there are logs though, but only
> from koji or
Markku Korkeala wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry if this a newbie question, I tried to search this
> but did not find good documentation on this problem.
>
> I'm in the process of upgrading the clojure package to
> next version, which has new dependencies. These dependencies
> require certain clojure
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:51:28PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>
> >> Sorry for being unclear. The spec file in dist-git would still show
> >> some (older) version of the %changelog entries under this model.
> >>
> >> The corrections would update the %changelog with all
* Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>> Sorry for being unclear. The spec file in dist-git would still show
>> some (older) version of the %changelog entries under this model.
>>
>> The corrections would update the %changelog with all the historic
>> entries. Since auto-generation stops at this commit, the
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:25:33PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:53:32PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> >>
> >> > Feel free to poke at it and see how it behaves.
> >> >
> >> > The script only considers:
> >> > -
* Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:53:32PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>>
>> > Feel free to poke at it and see how it behaves.
>> >
>> > The script only considers:
>> > - the last two years of commits
>> > - commits touching either the spec file or
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:53:32PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>
> > Feel free to poke at it and see how it behaves.
> >
> > The script only considers:
> > - the last two years of commits
> > - commits touching either the spec file or patches (ending with .patch)
> >
> >
* Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> Feel free to poke at it and see how it behaves.
>
> The script only considers:
> - the last two years of commits
> - commits touching either the spec file or patches (ending with .patch)
>
> We want a way to say: [Ignore XXX] (or simply [Ignore] if it's the current
>
On 24. 12. 19 9:50, Dan Čermák wrote:
Hi Miro,
I like your packaging dashboard a lot, I think this a good idea and an
improvement for the packaging experience!
Dan, thanks for your feedback and an offer to help.
Sorry for the very late reply.
Unfortunately, my idea to work on this during
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 05:41, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:32:46AM +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote:
> > Il giorno mar 28 gen 2020 alle ore 10:04 Richard W.M. Jones
> > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > > It's
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:27 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 09:54:59PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > The release field would need to be set by koji ignoring whatever is in
> > > the spec
>
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 09:54:59PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:37 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The release field would need to be set by koji ignoring whatever is in the
> > spec
> > file. How do we want to do this?
> > - Based on dates?
> > - Using
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:18 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> Honestly, the correct thing is to make it so the maven to RPM
> interface is as transparent as possible. We've done a reasonably good
> job with this in Rust, Ruby, and Python, and the situation is (slowly)
> improving in Go. But nobody has sat
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:32:46AM +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote:
> Il giorno mar 28 gen 2020 alle ore 10:04 Richard W.M. Jones
> ha scritto:
> >
> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> >
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:03:09AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you have to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795427
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:32:46AM +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote:
> Il giorno mar 28 gen 2020 alle ore 10:04 Richard W.M. Jones
> ha scritto:
> >
> > I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> > It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> >
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 10:53, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:21:41AM +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 10:03 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > * committing to git should build the package
> > >
> > > Is there a reason why this wouldn't be the case?
Il giorno mar 28 gen 2020 alle ore 10:04 Richard W.M. Jones
ha scritto:
>
> I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
> It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
> maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
> then you
Hi,
On 28-01-2020 10:37, Vascom wrote:
Are s390x builders ready for Mass Rebuild?
I see many fail builds only on s390x without logs.
I was about to ask the same thing, there are logs though, but only
from koji or mock, not from an actual build, e.g. :
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #14 from Petr Pisar ---
A potential fix was committed to the upstream as
d55a14617a40beb0dfda90ca2decc55918c0810c.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Hi,
Robert-André was faster than myself :)
Regards,
Javier
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:21:41AM +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 10:03 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > * committing to git should build the package
> >
> > Is there a reason why this wouldn't be the case?
>
> Hi,
> the answer for the above is just your following
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 05:44 Jerry James wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> The antlr4 package needs a reboot so that it can ship the various
> language runtime libraries, and so that it can be updated to the
> latest version. I have been in contact with the maintainers of the
> current antlr4 package and
Are s390x builders ready for Mass Rebuild?
I see many fail builds only on s390x without logs.
вт, 28 янв. 2020 г. в 11:39, Mohan Boddu :
>
> We are starting the mass rebuild now.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-01-27 at 21:23 +0100, Fabio
Dne 28. 01. 20 v 5:07 Scott Talbert napsal(a):
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Bill Chatfield via devel wrote:
>
>> Are any of you on the java-devel list so that I could move my newb
>> questions
>> there? I can guarantee that it's a low-traffic list so there's no
>> risk in
>> joining it. :-)
>>
>>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 05:08 Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Bill Chatfield via devel wrote:
>
> > Are any of you on the java-devel list so that I could move my newb
> questions
> > there? I can guarantee that it's a low-traffic list so there's no risk in
> > joining it. :-)
> >
> >
On Sun, 2020-01-26 at 00:12 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> - evolution-mapi
> - openchange(-client)
Hi,
the above two are rebuilt too.
Bye,
Milan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 10:03 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> * committing to git should build the package
>
> Is there a reason why this wouldn't be the case?
Hi,
the answer for the above is just your following point:
> * commit groups of packages together
aka the dependencies.
I always think that Fedora works fine if you maintain 1-5 packages.
It's possible to maintain 20 with a lot of work. And if you want to
maintain 100+ (things like the ocaml-* set that I help to maintain)
then you have to write your own automation. Could we do things
better? No one asked for
We are starting the mass rebuild now.
Thanks.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-01-27 at 21:23 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 4:46 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2020-01-27 at 16:34 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 27,
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 03:02:38PM -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:56 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> > It is "upstream" in the sense that it is under the same umbrella.
> > There are no plans to move the code to the main repo, because it's in
> > rust
82 matches
Mail list logo
