On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:36 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> 1. The logic is reversed: when I see "with" I think something is
> enabled,
>when I see "without" I think something is disabled. But it's
> actually
>the other way around here, which I find very confusing and often
>
On 03.04.20 22:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> So... could we please get a way to express this in rpm with a sane syntax:
>
> %define_cond docs 0%{?fedora} > 0
Oh please, yes.
Christopher
___
devel mailing list --
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
598 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d
condor-8.6.11-1.el7
340 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c499781e80
python-gnupg-0.4.4-1.el7
338
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809718
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9db436fe0e has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793146
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-404ee39e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809718
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-04dce15024 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793146
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-45604a8d3d has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809718
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813720
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813603
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-b6c633d5fe has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793146
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-67f67bad8e has been pushed to the Fedora 30 Modular testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 03:12:35PM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> Maybe libsecret spec could provide an empty libsecret-never-fail subpackage
> that would hard-require a libsecret server and the applications like geary
> would
> require that subpackage. (Alternatively libsecret-devel could provide
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2020 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2020
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-703f700e48 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815682
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2020 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2020
Hi Kyle,
Great to hear, thanks. If you'd like a comaintainer, please add me - it's
blocking one of our projects at work.
Thanks,
Michel
Apr 3, 2020 14:06:52 Kyle Fazzari :
> Hello Michel,
>
> Don't worry, I'm alive, I've just been slammed the last few weeks. I'll
> look into EPEL 8 soon.
>
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/04/04/report-389-ds-base-1.4.3.5-20200403git52e2894.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987118
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #24 from
# F32 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2020-04-06
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have 4 proposed Final blockers and 1 proposed Final
freeze exception to review, so let's have a Fedora 32 blocker review
meeting on Monday!
If you have time this
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. We met
last week and I don't think we have any urgent business this week.
There will be a blocker review meeting.
If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and
On 4/3/20 4:41 PM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
This is how a specific flavour of software development works centered on
a singular product, with a shared vision. The CPE relationship with
stakeholders is unique, it's clear the visions are not aligned across
all bodies (and we do not expect it to be)
On 03. 04. 20 13:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I've been waiting on:
$ koji wait-repo f33-build-side-20855 --build=ocaml-lacaml-9.3.2-17.fc33
for hours now. Seems like newRepo generation is again taking a very
long time?
Also it'd be nice if this command didn't time out after 2 hours
(seems
Hello,
Are there any plans to upgrade the spec file of rubygem-asciidoctor for
Fedora 31 to the 2.0.10 version?
Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
You have to create a database and a user with permissions in that database
for nextcloud.
Verify that the web server is running
Then go to http:///nextcloud, you will see the installer webpage,
select mysql as the database and set the user
and the database you previously created and it will
EPEL Issue #101 [1] has pointed out that our current policy for
stalled EPEL requests is fairly in-efficient and can cause some long
delays.
What do people think the process should be?
Here is an example:
* A packager opens a bugzilla requesting a package be added to EPEL.
They also express that
Le 20-04-02 à 13 h 30, Samuel Sieb a écrit :
The problem is that in the past there have been some packages that
have had to be updated first to successfully do the upgrade. As Kamil
said, the list can change at any time. The easiest way to ensure the
upgrade works is to make sure that your
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:31 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> 1. dnf — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768206 — NEW
> DNF prompts for GPG key import for "repo_gpgcheck=1"-repositories
> despite "rpm --import"-ing the keys first
>
> DNF has a separate database of GPG keys, which leads to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820788
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Rose-DB-Object-0.816-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43010071
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820787
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Rose-DB-0.782-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43010067
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820788
Bug ID: 1820788
Summary: perl-Rose-DB-Object-0.816 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Rose-DB-Object
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820788
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1676126
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1676126=edit
[patch] Update to 0.816 (#1820788)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820787
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1676125
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1676125=edit
[patch] Update to 0.782 (#1820787)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820787
Bug ID: 1820787
Summary: perl-Rose-DB-0.782 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Rose-DB
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Oh gosh, it's almost Final freeze time! (7 April)
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. dnf — DNF prompts for GPG key import for
"repo_gpgcheck=1"-repositories despite "rpm --import"-ing the keys
first — NEW
ACTION: "everyone" to come to agreement on a
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 10:41 AM Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> On 4/3/20 6:09 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 07:48, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >> The problem is that in the past there have been some packages that have
> >> had to be updated first to successfully do the upgrade.
> >
> > So
On 03. 04. 20 22:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
So... could we please get a way to express this in rpm with a sane syntax:
%define_cond docs 0%{?fedora} > 0
(Naming and details of syntax are just examples, but the important
parts are: one line, name before value, positive logic).
Yes
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020, 20:26 Randy Barlow
wrote:
> On 4/3/20 3:08 PM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> > It may have caught that for sure but it would have opened a lot more
> > problems as stakeholders try to counter each others requirements with
> > new more specific requirements to influence the
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 02:23:12PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Fabio Valenti made this comment in the FESCo ticket[1].
>
> "Side note: I think more people would be amenable to including
> "conditionals" into their packages if they weren't only shown off as
> `%if eln this else that`. I
On Wednesday, 1 April 2020 18:13:51 CEST W. Michael Petullo wrote:
> I would like to co-maintain or take over the maintenance of our Hugo
> package. The package presently does not build, and thus it is at risk
> of being orphaned:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799514
>
> --
>
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:57 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 14:46 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > > Another is requirement 19 ("As a Project
> > contributor...I want to be able to use kanban boards...So that
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 14:46 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > I assume Gitlab likes money. :P
>
> $100/month per user for Ultimate (the only offering that meets the
> "requirements")... 2339 packages in FAS... so $233900 * 12 works
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 01:53:18PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:28 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:55:48AM +0200, Clement Verna wrote:
> >
> > ...snip...
> >
> > (side note: can people please try and trim their replies to this list?
> > I know gmail
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:46 pm, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
packages
Sorry, I meant: packagers
Probably only packagers need access to dist-git, but we have other
Fedora teams besides packagers that will need to use the instance too.
So that's a minimum
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:10 pm, Adam Williamson
wrote:
I assume Gitlab likes money. :P
$100/month per user for Ultimate (the only offering that meets the
"requirements")... 2339 packages in FAS... so $233900 * 12 works out to
roughly $3 million per year just for Fedora, assuming we never
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 14:41 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi said:
> > Fedora Infrastructure has always been open and welcoming of community
> > work. The VAST majority of folks who have worked on it (at least the
> > operations side) in the past or are now, started out
Hi,
Does anyone know how to contact Hans Ulrich Niedermann? He seems to
have log in last on February 4th.
I've opened a bug asking for either an EPEL 8 branch for terminus-fonts,
or to be added as an admin or committer, on February 24th:
Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi said:
> Fedora Infrastructure has always been open and welcoming of community
> work. The VAST majority of folks who have worked on it (at least the
> operations side) in the past or are now, started out in the community
> and eventually ended up doing it full time.
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 3/18 (x86_64)
ID: 566237 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso release_identification
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/566237
ID: 566238 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/566238
ID:
Hi,
Does anyone know how to contact Kyle Fazzari? He seems to have log in
last on October 31st last year, and last updated his squashfuse package
in 2018.
I've opened a bug asking for either an EPEL 8 branch for squashfuse, or
to be added as an admin or committer, on March 2nd:
On 4/3/20 3:08 PM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
It may have caught that for sure but it would have opened a lot more
problems as stakeholders try to counter each others requirements with
new more specific requirements to influence the decision.
This is how software development is *supposed* to work.
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 19:28 +0100, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020, 18:21 Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 13:04 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > > One thing I'll note here: this is *exactly* the kind of thing that
> > > > would have come to light very quickly if
Hi Leigh,
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 17:00 +0100, Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 4:20 PM Jeremy Cline
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 05:38 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:29 AM Michal Konecny <
> > mkone...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 19:30 +0100, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020, 18:22 Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 13:18 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 01:04:33PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > > For what it's worth, when I sent the list I
On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:12 +0200, Markus Larsson wrote:
>
> On 3 April 2020 19:18:57 CEST, Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 01:04:33PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, when I sent the list I included a reminder that
> > > FOSS is always our strong
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020, 17:42 Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 12:07 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:59 AM Leigh Griffin
> wrote:
> > > > Can we *please* see the final actual definitely official Fedora list,
> > > > then? If this is supposed to be an open
On 03. 04. 20 20:23, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Fabio Valenti made this comment in the FESCo ticket[1].
"Side note: I think more people would be amenable to including
"conditionals" into their packages if they weren't only shown off as
`%if eln this else that`. I think there's more value in doing
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200402.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200403.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 214
Downgraded packages: 95
Size of added packages: 41.96 MiB
Size of dropped packages
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
