Unresponsive packagers: suanand and vponcova

Good Morning Everyone, We have been emailing daily the following users to notify that the email they have set in FAS does not correspond to a valid bugzilla account. This is a requirement for Fedora packagers. Does someone know how to contact them? suanand - emailed since April 5th suanand is

Re: convert everything to rpmautospec?

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 09:18:09AM +0200, Ondrej Mosnáček wrote: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 at 16:30, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > [...] > > Let's look at it in another way: would you say that the people who leaved > > in the > > 14th century were liars for sayin

Re: convert everything to rpmautospec?

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 02:55:36PM +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [08/04/2024 09:02] : > > > > Well, you and Kevin see "salami tactics" (whatever that may be), > > FTR, I have no idea what "salami tactics" is. > > > while I see normal engineering practice: some new

Re: [Pierre-Yves Chibon] Unresponsive packagers: nknazeko

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 11:20:59AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 10:44:18PM +0100, Vit Mojzis wrote: > > Nikola left Red Hat and hence changed the email address in FAS. I'm > > guessing that only her Red Hat email was tied to a BZ account. > &

Re: [Pierre-Yves Chibon] Unresponsive packagers: nknazeko

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 10:44:18PM +0100, Vit Mojzis wrote: > Hello Pierre, Hi Vit, Sorry for the late reply > Nikola left Red Hat and hence changed the email address in FAS. I'm > guessing that only her Red Hat email was tied to a BZ account. > I'll try and let her know. Do I understand

Unresponsive packagers: yangrr

Good Morning Everyone, Since January 17th, we have been emailing daily the following user to notify that the email they have set in FAS does not correspond to a valid bugzilla account. This is a requirement for Fedora packagers. Does someone know how to contact yangrr? yangrr is watching

Unresponsive packagers: nknazeko

Good Morning Everyone, Since November 1st, we have been emailing daily the following user to notify that the email they have set in FAS does not correspond to a valid bugzilla account. This is a requirement for Fedora packagers. Does someone know how to contact nknazeko? nknazeko is maintainer

Re: Synching user database from Fedora IPA to pagure

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:13:35AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > I'd like to start writing a script to synch users/groups from Fedora IPA > to pagure.io and src.fp.o: both pagure.io and src.fp.o logins are based > on Fedora accounts, but the Pagure user database is only updated when a

Unresponsive packagers: kubo

Good Morning Everyone, Since June 30th, we have been emailing daily the following user to notify that the email they have set in FAS does not correspond to a valid bugzilla account. This is a requirement for Fedora packagers. Does someone know how to contact kubo? kubo is watching

Re: The new Change discussion process is painful

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 10:46:04AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 13. 09. 23 v 9:08 Remi Collet napsal(a): > > Le 13/09/2023 à 08:09, Adam Williamson a écrit : > > > On Wed, 2023-09-13 at 05:51 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > it is really a pain that the

Re: PDC replacement proposal

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 11:35:19AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 04:51:22PM +0200, Tomas Hrcka wrote: > > Hello all, it took us a few years but we are finally getting rid of the PDC > > project. Thanks to the ARC research we identified use cases in our tooling > > and

Re: Update on DNF05 in Fedora

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:27:37AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 08:41:42AM -0400, Samantha Bueno wrote: > > I want to close on a positive note and commend my team for the incredible > > amount of hard work they have poured into this project thus far, as well as > > people

Non-responsive packagers: sbluhm, shaneallcroft

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Nonresponsive maintainers ( was Re: Red Hat Bugzilla mail FAS field is now handled correctly by Bugzilla sync scripts )

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 05:10:15PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 02:49:10PM +0100, Michal Konecny wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > > > TL;DR; Check if you have correct e-mail in Red Hat Bugzilla Mail field in > > Fedora Accounts [0]. Empty mail is also OK. > > > > the Red Hat

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 10:36:52AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 10/12/22 17:47, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming > > wrote: > > > > On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > Maybe call it the

Re: Inactive provenpackagers to be removed from group

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > In accordance with FESCo policy[1], the following provenpackagers will > be submitted for removal in two weeks based on a lack of Koji builds > submitted in the last six months. If you received this directly, you > can reply off-list to

Re: Non-responsive packagers: benzea

On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 11:30:07AM +0200, Benjamin Berg wrote: > Hi, > > sorry for not dealing with this earlier. I was somewhat out for a > while, and didn't give the mail much significance. > > What happened is that I'll be leaving Red Hat. As a first step, I > changed my FAS email address

Re: Non-responsive packagers: benzea

case). Hi Tomáš, Thanks for pointing this out, that's what I get for re-using an old email as template :( The correct user is benzea indeed. Thanks for pointing him to this thread! Pierre > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 9:59 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > Good Morning Everyone, >

Non-responsive packagers: michaelanguskelly

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Once again, more than 8 days delayed notifications

On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 09:36:14AM -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 at 09:25, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I thought the notification delay mess was fixed. Apparently, I was wrong. > > > > > > No, I believe the service which is behind these emails is called FMN. It

Re: Once again, more than 8 days delayed notifications

On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 05:16:55PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > > > Am 09.07.22 um 15:36 schrieb Stephen Smoogen: > > > > > > On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 at 09:25, Ralf Corsépius > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I thought the notification delay mess was fixed.

Re: [RFC] Build tag in RPM: from NVR to NVRB

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 12:27:57AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 12:15 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 3:48 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 01:05:31PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > > > The most

Non-responsive packagers: michaelanguskelly

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Can't fedpkg new-sources (403)

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 01:45:52PM -0400, Neal Becker wrote: >On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:38 PM Neal Becker <[1]ndbeck...@gmail.com> >wrote: > > I believe it is failing on the line: >   File "/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pyrpkg/lookaside.py", line > 298, in upload >

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 10:29:54AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 11/02/22 20:24, Kevin Fenzi ha scritto: > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:33:13AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > >> Il 11/02/22 12:20, Florian Weimer ha scritto: > >>> * Mattia Verga via devel: > >>> > Il

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:24:24AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:33:13AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Il 11/02/22 12:20, Florian Weimer ha scritto: > > > * Mattia Verga via devel: > > > > > >> Il 11/02/22 10:41, Miro Hrončok ha scritto: > > >>> On 11. 02. 22

Re: Non-responsive packagers: lef, msehnout, shaneallcroft

On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 10:47:11AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 9:58 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to > > either adjust their

Non-responsive packagers: lef, msehnout, shaneallcroft

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Action Required: Bugzilla - API Authentication changes

On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 01:41:01PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 01. 02. 22 13:37, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hi Miro, > > > > Thanks for forwarding this announcement. > > Apparently the talk about "improving communication between RHBZ and > > the Fedora Project" has not born fruit yet. ;) > >

Re: Non-responsive packagers: anoopcs, gtiwari, msehnout, sebix, vanessa_kris

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 02:31:57PM +0530, Anoop C S wrote: > On Thu, 2022-01-20 at 09:57 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking > > them to > > either adjust their

Re: Non-responsive packagers: anoopcs, gtiwari, msehnout, sebix, vanessa_kris

On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 10:04:25AM +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > Hello, > > > - vanessa_kris contacted since December 10th > > > > vanessa_kris is main admin of rpms/python-git-changelog > > vanessa_kris has a bugzilla override on rpms/python-git-changelog > > vanessa_kris is main admin of

Non-responsive packagers: anoopcs, gtiwari, msehnout, sebix, vanessa_kris

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Workflow and other problems with the Fedora container infrastructure

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 08:42:30AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 6:57 PM Kevin Fenzi <[1]ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 02:14:19PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > One of the things that has recently happened in the Koji space is the >

Non-responsive packager: kasong

Good Morning Everyone, The packager listed here has been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Using YubiKey for accounts.fedoraproject.org OTP?

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:27:43PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello, > > I've been trying to add the OPT token from accounts.fedoraproject.org to my > yubikey. I get a QR code and a otpauth://totp/username?secret=xxx URI. > > I copypasted the xxx secret (56 characters: digits and uppercase

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:57:12AM +0200, Peter Boy wrote: > > > > Am 27.09.2021 um 10:47 schrieb Ankur Sinha : > > > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 21:20:07 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > >> Should the @java-maint-sig group be removed from any packages it is > >> still associated with? Should it be

Non-responsive packager: michelmno

Good Morning Everyone, The packager listed here has been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: How to get list of retired packages?

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Hi. > > What is the best way to get list of retired packages in F35? I can get list > of all retired packages by scanning dist-git. But if I want it for one > release of Fedora? And I do not want to do that manually; I rather want

Re: FAS email for authentication

On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 11:13:19AM -0400, Christopher wrote: > Why does FAS use the email forwarding address when I use it to > authenticate, rather than the permanent @fedoraproject.org alias for > the address? > > I should be able to change my forwarding address without changing how >

Bochecha unavailable for a little while

Good Morning Everyone, I am in contact with bochecha who has asked me that I announce his un-availability for personal reason for a little while. To this end, he has orphaned the package "buildstream" on Wednesday. There may be more coming. Bochecha still wants to come back to Fedora once things

Re: rpmautospec: Invitiation to Test

On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 02:00:00PM +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote: > Hey everybody, > > we've recently deployed the changes needed to enable automatic RPM > release numbers and changelogs to Koji in staging, and now we want you > to throw things at it! > > Detailed information is below, but the

Re: why some package are retired and others are retired without be orphan ?

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:53:47PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:11:37AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > > > while https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/projectM-jack is retired , > > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pub

Re: why some package are retired and others are retired without be orphan ?

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:11:37AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hi, > > while https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/projectM-jack is retired , > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/publican-fedora and https://src.fedo > raproject.org/rpms/gdesklets have the button orphan , why ? Because they

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed from their packages

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:25:01PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some accounts have > not > been migrated: > - Accounts that have been set inactive by their owner > - Accounts that are

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: nando pavlix

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:51:35AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 19. 04. 21 10:52, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:12:34PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > > > The packagers listed here have been

Re: Disabling BZ `fedora_requires_release_note` flag

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 09:11:19AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 4:13 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > What about the unused "qa contact field"? Kevin suggested dropping > > qa-extras [1], but it never went anywhere, afaics? > > > Good idea. I have a few other

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: nando pavlix

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:12:34PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to > either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS > matches an existing b

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: liangwen12year nando pavlix zoglesby

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 01:41:41PM -, Zach Oglesby wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:19 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > > > Huh. That still exists? What a throwback! > > > > I sent a tweet in zoglesby's direction. He posted about a week ago, so > > hopefu

Inactive packagers to be removed from their packages

Good Morning Everyone, When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some accounts have not been migrated: - Accounts that have been set inactive by their owner - Accounts that are disabled - Accounts marked as spam This resulted in some packager accounts not being migrated. As a

Inactive packagers to be removed from their packages

Good Morning Everyone, When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some accounts have not been migrated: - Accounts that have been set inactive by their owner - Accounts that are disabled - Accounts marked as spam This resulted in some packager accounts not being migrated. As a

Non-responsive maintainer: liangwen12year nando pavlix zoglesby

Good Morning Everyone, The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: Has dist-git changed/broken in the last few hours?

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:52:16PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > $ git pull --rebase > fatal: '/rpms/libguestfs' does not appear to be a git repository > fatal: Could not read from remote repository. > > Please make sure you have the correct access rights > and the repository exists. > >

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: kir

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 06:44:21PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On ti, 16 maalis 2021, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > Since February 24th the packager kir has been receiving a daily email asking > > them to either adjust their bugzi

Non-responsive maintainer: kir

Good Morning Everyone, Since February 24th the packager kir has been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: libravatar ported to Fedora's AWS

On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 10:32:23PM +, clime wrote: > Hello, > > I have just finished port of libravatar.org service to server provided > by Fedora. Big thanks to the Fedora project for sponsoring libravatar. > Avatars in pagure.io, src.fp.o, Bodhi should now load much faster. Awesome,

Re: Bodhi client prompting for a password

On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 12:15:53AM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 9:31 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > > > On 03. 03. 21 21:08, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > I want to run this command: > > > > > > > >bodhi updates trigger-tests

Re: Fedora Account System and Bugzilla Mismatch email

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:27:44AM -, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > Hey, > > I got an email asking me to change my fedora email to match my BZ account. > Problem is, in BZ I have to use my redhat account which allows me to be > granted special permissions for RH-related bugs. Fedora wants to do

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 01:07:44AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 02. 03. 21 22:05, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > The devil is in the details: pre-release, snapinfo, minorbump aren't really > > covered by distance being just an integer bumped. > > I don't see this covered

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 09:30:41PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 8:20 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 03:38:35PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 3:01 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >

Non-responsive maintainer: sabbaka

Good Morning Everyone, Since February 7th the packager sabbaka has been receiving a daily email asking them to either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS matches an existing bugzilla account. Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:

Re: git push on master branch rejected.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:28:53AM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > On 2/22/21 2:39 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 05:21:33PM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > >> > >> Thanks you for your rapid reply! > >> > >> On 2/2

Re: git push on master branch rejected.

On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 05:21:33PM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > > Thanks you for your rapid reply! > > On 2/21/21 4:57 PM, Michael Young wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Feb 2021, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > >> I apologies if I missed something... If there is a > >> thread that talks about this please

Re: restic update and src.fedoraproject.org and Self Introduction

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 07:19:26PM -0500, Kevin Anderson wrote: > Thank you! I'm unsure of what I was doing wrong initially but I > appreciate your help in resolving it! As James pointed out you'll need to use fedpkg if you're not a packager. The workflow is documented at:

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 08:00:49PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 17. 02. 21 19:46, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:02:34AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main > > > > > > == Summary == > > > > > > This Change

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 03:38:35PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 3:01 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > On 16. 02. 21 14:48, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > if version_at(commit) != last_version: > > > return 0 > > > > Should this be "return 1"? > > No, 0 is

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

e git repo (in the form of git tags). > > > > > > Note: This proposal is about changing the way the `Release` and > > `%changelog` sections of the '''spec files''' are filled, not about > > removing them from the SRPM or binary RPM. > > > > == Owner == > >

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 06:08:31PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 12. 02. 21 17:20, Ben Cotton wrote: > > ** Adjust the packaging so rpmautospec does not live in a specific, > > versionized python environment (and thus could be use to bootstrap > > python) > > Thank you! > > Don't hesitate to

Re: src.fedoraproject.org branch conversion to rawhide/main tomorrow

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 09:59:24AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 03:50:06PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > This is something we explicitly did not want on the git level, which > > is why there is a main → rawhide link, but no master → rawhide link. > > But it could

Re: More distgit attached to Fedora Zuul CI

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 03:35:11PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 09. 02. 21 15:27, Tom Stellard wrote: > > Has there been any more discussion about disabling simple-koji-ci on > > packages with Zuul enabled? > > It's generally disabled AFAIK. Or broken. Same outcome. AFAIK it's still running.

Re: src.fedoraproject.org branch conversion to rawhide/main tomorrow

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 03:35:27PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 05. 02. 21 v 12:39 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > > On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 12:11:45PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > * Kevin Fenzi: > > > > > > > Once the change is comple

Re: src.fedoraproject.org branch conversion to rawhide/main tomorrow

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 12:11:45PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Kevin Fenzi: > > > Once the change is completed you will want to checkout rawhide/main > > instead of master and update/recreate any existing forks you have. > > > > See > >

Re: Proposal: gate stable release critical path updates on openQA test results

On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 05:24:11PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 09:34:29PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > So if anything, I think this change is in line with your views here. > > > > Well, if (and as long as) the gating only blocks the autopush and does not

Re: HOWTO: Change default branch on pagure.io projects

On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 07:16:44AM -, Wolfgang Stoeggl via devel wrote: > > git push origin :master > > (This deletes the old ‘master’ branch) > > git push origin :master > remote: Branch deletion is not allowed > remote: Denied push for ref 'refs/heads/master' for user '**' > remote: All

Re: Planned Outage - taiga - 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC

On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 05:33:08PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > There will be an outage starting at 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC > which will last approximately 3 hours. > > To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 09:14:40PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 8:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > >

Re: Stale proven packagers

On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:39:26PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2020-12-22 at 13:23 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > > Perhaps we need a process for cleaning up membership of this extremely > > > powerful group? If the FAS password of *any one* of those user accounts > > > were

Re: Stale proven packagers

On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 12:39:56PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > A propos of some discussion of the Solarwinds news, it occurred to me > to check how many proven packager accounts there are in FAS. There are > 251, which seems like a lot. Then it occurred to me to check how many > of them are

Planned Outage - taiga - 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC

There will be an outage starting at 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC which will last approximately 3 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2021-01-05 07:00UTC' Reason for outage: Upgrade to a more recent/patched taiga

Planned Outage - taiga - 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC

There will be an outage starting at 2021-01-05 07:00 UTC which will last approximately 3 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2021-01-05 07:00UTC' Reason for outage: Upgrade to a more recent/patched taiga

Re: GitLab AMA Topic Follow Up: Branches

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 04:18:44PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Its been a few weeks but there are still two topics left to cover from > the original AMA session. This week's topic is Branches. As always, > below are some links to the original documents and chat logs from the >

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 08:42:53PM -0700, Jerry James wrote: > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 3:22 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > * Finally releng is looking at establishing a sidetag cleanup policy. > > A reminder that sidetags should be short lived and only created when > > needed. koji must generate

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 10:29:12AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 10:36:36AM +0100, Robert-André Mauchin wrote: > > On 12/3/20 4:02 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main > > > > > > == Summary == > > > > > > This Change

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:56:09PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote: >On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:21, Pierre-Yves Chibon <[1]pin...@pingoured.fr> >wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:08:26PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:0

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:39:35PM +0100, Petr Šabata wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:34 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:16:56PM +0100, Petr Šabata wrote: > > > Since I don't see those on the list, does this impact > > > >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:16:56PM +0100, Petr Šabata wrote: > Since I don't see those on the list, does this impact > > * rpkg (fedpkg)? Wrapper to git, should not be impacted. The only thing I could think of was: when we fedpkg clone an empty git repo, have fedpkg do the "git branch -M main"

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 04:08:26PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:03 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main > > > > == Summary == > > > > This Change will move Fedora git repositories to use "main" as the > > default

Re: GitLab AMA Topic Follow Up: Namespace & Issue Tracking

On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:22:25AM +, Aoife Moloney wrote: > # GitLab AMA Session Topic - Namespace & Issue Tracking > > Hi everyone, > > Thanks again for your involvement in the GitLab AMA session on IRC in > September. This email discussion thread is on Namespace & Issue > Tracking. I have

Re: CPE Weekly: 2020-11-22

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 06:30:10AM -, Tom Seewald wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 at 05:54, Aoife Moloney > wrote: > > > > What is OSBS? Please don't use undefined acronyms. > > OSBS = OpenShift Build Service It's the tool we use to build containers in our infrastructure (and thus also

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-11-11)

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:11:28AM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:58:22AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:52:06AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > Matthew Miller wrote: > > > > Well, except, it clearly

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-11-11)

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:52:06AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > > Well, except, it clearly *does* work that way. We have many > > lightly-maintained packages in practice. > > Do we really? Which are those packages? Every single package that failed to build from

Re: Self Introduction: Davide Cavalca

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:52:09AM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On Thu, 2020-10-29 at 13:12 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >   > > This might be a good time to start discussing the possibility of > > having > > "organization" ACLs (e.g. if a bunch of employees at FB, or Datto, or > >

Re: Mass spec change: Replace Python 3 version globs (3.?) with macros to support 3.10

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 02:05:53PM -, Tomas Hrnciar wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am just letting you know that we successfully replaced all 3.? globs > yesterday. Thanks! Both for doing it and the heads-up :) Pierre ___ devel mailing list --

Re: GitLab AMA Topic Discussion: Permissions & Access

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:56:11AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 8:57 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 09:17:04PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > Thanks again for your

Re: GitLab AMA Topic Discussion: Permissions & Access

On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 09:17:04PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Thanks again for your involvement in the GitLab AMA session on IRC in > September. As promised, this is the first of a 5-part series breaking > down main topics that came up during the session. I will send a topic >

Re: Unresponsive packagers: wolnei and dturecek

On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 09:08:29AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 09:53:58PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Friday, October 9, 2020 4:59:32 PM CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > - dturecek has no corresponding bugzilla account - First notificat

Re: Unresponsive packagers: wolnei and dturecek

On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 09:53:58PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Friday, October 9, 2020 4:59:32 PM CEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > - dturecek has no corresponding bugzilla account - First notification Oct > > 1st > > Dominik left Red Hat ~10 days ago, so he probably l

Unresponsive packagers: wolnei and dturecek

Good Morning Everyone, The following two accounts do not have a valid bugzilla account associated with their email in FAS. They have received a daily notification about it (and thus so have we) and so far in vain. - wolnei has no corresponding bugzilla account - First notification Sept 29th

Re: EPEL8 Branch Request: perl-Data-GUID

On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 03:27:22PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 03:22:46PM +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > > > > Hello, all. > > > > Ralf Corsepius has requested that someone give Paul Howarth and Jitka > > Plesnikova collaborator r

Re: EPEL8 Branch Request: perl-Data-GUID

On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 03:22:46PM +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > > Hello, all. > > Ralf Corsepius has requested that someone give Paul Howarth and Jitka > Plesnikova collaborator rights in bug #1870755 . Their FAS usernames > are pghmcfc and jplesnik respectively. > > Is there someone on the

Re: Unresponsive packagers: ekulik, imcleod and lsun

On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 04:04:46AM -, Liming Sun wrote: > Apology for the late reply. I had email issues from upstream community > recently. Somehow my Redhat Bugzilla account seems not accessible anymore > either. I recreated the account with the same email address > (l...@mellanox.com).

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >