https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270514
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270521
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2024 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2024
churchyard merged a pull-request against the project:
`perl-Module-Build-WithXSpp` that you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-Build-WithXSpp/pull-request/1
--
churchyard merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Wx-GLCanvas` that
you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Wx-GLCanvas/pull-request/3
--
___
churchyard merged a pull-request against the project:
`perl-ExtUtils-Typemaps-Default` that you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-Typemaps-Default/pull-request/1
--
churchyard merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Growl-GNTP` that
you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Growl-GNTP/pull-request/1
--
___
perl-devel
churchyard merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-ExtUtils-CppGuess`
that you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CppGuess/pull-request/2
--
Pavel Zhukov wrote:
> I see you have received review of the MR . Emails have been answered by
> Bjorn too.
If you don't have time to maintain Aunit, then please give me or Dennis
access to the package so we can take care of it.
Björn Persson
pgpFCmfiDkSCT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for your response.
> I see you have received review of the MR .
Yes, indeed. I'm grateful that Bjorn was willing to have look at the PR despite
not being a co-maintainer of the package.
> Emails have been answered by Bjorn too.
Yes, but I got no reply from you as the sole
I see you have received review of the MR . Emails have been answered by Bjorn
too.
--
Pavel
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024, at 20:17, Dennis van Raaij wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been trying to contact package maintainer Pavel Zhukov (landgraf).
>
> I submitted a proposal to update package 'aunit' some
Hi,
I've been trying to contact package maintainer Pavel Zhukov (landgraf).
I submitted a proposal to update package 'aunit' some months ago [1] but
received no response from its maintainer, Pavel Zhukov. This proposal supersedes
an earlier one for which I received no response either. I tried to
So, valkey is then the one the AWS employee did.
Thank you Jonathan for the work on this.
On 3/28/24 11:13, Jonathan Wright via devel wrote:
This is the one previously known as "PlaceHolderKV".
I forgot to mention but redict is packaged and ready for testing in
Bodhi:
This is the one previously known as "PlaceHolderKV".
I forgot to mention but redict is packaged and ready for testing in Bodhi:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=redict-7.3.0~rc
I'll be packing up valkey as soon as they have a tagged release.
After following redict and valkey
Valkey is another fork, sponsored by the Linux Foundation.
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-launches-open-source-valkey-community
It came out just today.
On 3/23/24 11:35, Jonathan Wright via devel wrote:
KeyDB builds are in Bodhi and ready for testing for all Fedora
Dear all,
Just a heads up that the legacy libgee06 package is FTBFS for
F40/F41:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261317
and only has one dependent, libfep:
```
❯ fedrq whatrequires libgee06-devel
libfep-0.1.0-24.fc40.src
❯ fedrq whatrequires libgee06-devel -b f39
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 10:33 AM Arthur Bols wrote:
>
> On 28/03/2024 12:22, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 6:11 AM Arthur Bols wrote:
> > This seems reasonable to me. Do we have any packaged themes that need
> > to be adjusted alongside it?
> Thanks for taking a look!
>
> I don't
On 28/03/2024 12:22, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 6:11 AM Arthur Bols wrote:
This seems reasonable to me. Do we have any packaged themes that need
to be adjusted alongside it?
Thanks for taking a look!
I don't think so. There is nothing breaking in the changelog for themes
and
In one week (2024-04-04), or slightly later, I plan to update the
python-keyring package to 25.0.0 in F41/Rawhide[1]. Upstream reports[2]:
v25.0.0
===
Deprecations and Removals
-
- Removed check for config in XDG_DATA_HOME on Linux systems. (#99)
- In platform
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240327.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240328.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 76
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 6.72 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
I know, we just did flatbuffers 24.3.7, but there is a bugfix update,
24.3.25, and the ABI and SONAME version always break, so here we go again!
In one week (2024-04-04), or slightly later, I plan to update the
flatbuffers package to 24.3.25 in F41/Rawhide[1]. As usual, this
includes an
OLD: Fedora-40-20240327.n.0
NEW: Fedora-40-20240328.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 141
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 4.18 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
Hot news:
The last phase https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_4
has been approved with FESCO.
Two weeks ago we had:
* 23821spec files in Fedora
* 30463license tags in all spec files
* 11091 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet
* 4996 tags can be trivially
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 40 Branched 20240328.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
Dne 28. 03. 24 v 10:59 dop. Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
I also think the conversion should only be done if the full License string can
be converted. Partial conversion is confusing, and there is not much value,
since trivial conversion is, well, trivial, and whoever will eventually
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 6:11 AM Arthur Bols wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Kvantum 1.1.0 has been released and changed the default compilation to
> Qt6. Due to this change, I would like to change the packaging such that
> the base package is Qt6 and a subpackage provides the Qt5 plugin. This
> causes
Hi all,
Kvantum 1.1.0 has been released and changed the default compilation to
Qt6. Due to this change, I would like to change the packaging such that
the base package is Qt6 and a subpackage provides the Qt5 plugin. This
causes major changes to the spec and resulting packages, so I would
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 08:32:41PM +0200, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
>
> 27. maaliskuuta 2024 12.59.11 GMT+02:00 Petr Pisar
> kirjoitti:
> >V Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 02:52:50PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
> >> I have no strong opinion how to process with the case of "MIT and BSD and
> >>
On 27/03/2024 14:28, Andreas Schneider wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to reach the maintainer of fswatch [1]. fswatch will be a
dependency of neovim 0.10 and I would like to get it updated to be prepared
for the release. It looks like the maintainer is unresponsive. I've open the
bugs [2] and [3]. [3]
On 27. 03. 24 23:15, Maxwell G wrote:
One way to mitigate would be to make the proposed behavior opt-in only,
with the possibility to either build wheel with -w option (already
existing) or e.g. -p (now-proposed: reading from pyproject.toml) in case
backend doesn't have
Hi,
I'm trying to reach the maintainer of fswatch [1]. fswatch will be a
dependency of neovim 0.10 and I would like to get it updated to be prepared
for the release. It looks like the maintainer is unresponsive. I've open the
bugs [2] and [3]. [3] is the bug for this non-responsive maintainer
30 matches
Mail list logo
