While we are at it, here is another great update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
* New version introduced in F11.
* Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
* Useless update description "update to 4.7.1".
* An
Hi,
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only.
> * Useless u
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> Hi,
>
> 2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> > While we are at it, here is another great update:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
> >
> > * New version introduced i
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
> with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Regards
Till
pgpdxHb1B1LoX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.f
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
>
> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
> desktop)
I think for many people the issue is not that it can be an update (maybe the
enhancements etc are useful to someone).
On 03/06/2010 11:28 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
>
>> maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
>> with an official policy.
>>
> Did the mc update break something?
>
Even if it did not it would be
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
>> > While we are at it, here is another great update:
>> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA
2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
>
>
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
>>
>> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
>> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
>> desktop)
>
> I think for many people the issue is not that it can be an update (maybe the
> enha
On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
[...]
> > Because I don't understand the
> > criteria for Fedora package update.
> >
> > Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
>
> Becaus
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:30 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> I have seen some discussions, but I don't follow them. I'm waiting for
> results ;)
Get involved, try to influence the discussion.
> Pity. There are many Fedora policies that are useless for end users
> like me, but update poli
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 21:10 +0100 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann'
Mierzejewski:
> On Saturday, 06 March 2010 at 18:49, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:17 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> [...]
> > > Because I don't understand the
> > > criteria for Fedora package updat
Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> >
[snipped]
> > PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
> > there are many users who dislike Ubuntu because bugs are not fixed and they
> > have to live with them far too
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
> versions to F11.
>
Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
And I
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:16:45PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> > 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> > >
> [snipped]
> > > PS other places that have more stable updates also have their problems -
> > > there are many users who dislik
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>
>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>> versions to F11.
>>
>
> Why? I don't want to update
But you are
2010/3/6 Christoph Wickert :
> Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 19:30 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>
>> I have seen some discussions, but I don't follow them. I'm waiting for
>> results ;)
>
> Get involved, try to influence the discussion.
>
I'm just a guest here :)
I'm not a Fedora developer so m
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>>
>>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>>> versions to F11.
>>>
>>
>> W
On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>
>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
>> versions to F11.
>>
>
> Why? I don't want to
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:40:20PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >>
> >> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> >> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pu
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>>>
>>> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
>>> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in p
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:48:23AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> deal with the problems that might arise with the new version. But if the
> new version is dumped upon me in the middle of a week, I'm left without
> a choice. I have to immediately deal with whatever problems arise from
> the upgra
2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
> components revision number .
I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
I hope that RHEL 6 will be released soon, Fedora 11 is going to be
On 03/07/2010 04:14 AM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> I'm just a guest here :)
>
> I'm not a Fedora developer so my vote doesn't really matter.
>
Getting involved does not require a vote and any user position if
expressed in a constructive fashion does matter and is part of how we
can form a decis
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>> components revision number .
>
> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
>
I understand that. However th
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> > But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
> > full system update?
> >
>
> Time. A simple "yum update" or make a selective update takes a few
> minutes. A whole system update takes m
On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
> addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
but generally it's bound to fail.
A security update in an application
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 17:48 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
>> > But you are updating to latest KDE in f11. So what is the deal with
>> > full system update?
>> >
>>
>> Time. A simple "yum update" or make a selective
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:28:32AM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
> > addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
>
> I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases
Em Sáb, 2010-03-06 às 18:00 +0100, Christoph Wickert escreveu:
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it&#
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:07:13PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Most of our packagers follow the guidelines from the wiki:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_guidelines
> This means, they apply at least three criteria:
> * An update should not break something
> * An upd
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Moreover you also have the option of updating security fixes only.
That option doesn't really exist, as was already demonstrated:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/131926.html
Björn Persson
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed mess
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
>>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>>> components revision number .
>>
>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
On Saturday 06 March 2010 03:50:22 pm Henrique Junior wrote:
> A few days ago the discussion on policy updates are maturing and that it
> is beneficial to Fedora, but it's useless to start threads with the
> attitude of "pointing fingers and accusing" using an ironic tone.
Agreed. Please stop star
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:52 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Yet moreover you also have the option of updating bugfixes in
>> addition, leaving the enhancement updates out.
>
> I really don't think I have that option. It might work in some cases,
> but gener
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
>>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil:
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>>> in past 11 yea
> Why? I don't want to update/reinstall all my machines every 6 months.
Since you don't want to update every 6 months, you want people to keep
updating every now and then?
Cheers,
Debarshi
--
One reason that life is complex is that it has a real part and an
imaginary part.
-- Andrew Koenig
-
On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
> plenty of time to adapt.
>
If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
big ev
2010/3/7 Rahul Sundaram :
> On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>
>
> If you have a large codebase two months is
On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
wrote:
> While we are at it, here is another great update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>
> * New version introduced in F11.
> * Doesn't fix any bugs but it's an enhancement only
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>
>
> If you have a l
On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>
updates-testing should not be used for this purpose because among other
things you might want to push
>>> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>>> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
>>> plenty of time to adapt.
>>>
>>
>> If you have a large codebase two months is barely enough time to even
>> big evaluating a move
>>
>
> Then make i
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>>
>
> updates-testing should not be used for thi
2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil :
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>
>>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>>>
>>
>> updates-
2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski:
> 2010/3/7 Orcan Ogetbil:
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
get too many complaints. But make it available for tho
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 01:49 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
> Let's consider a situation - I'm developing a project in php 5.2. This
> project might work fine on php 5.3 - I don't know I didn't tested it
> yet. I'm depending on 5.2 version. Testing this code for a new php
> will take some ti
On Sat 6 March 2010 5:54:11 pm Conrad Meyer wrote:
> All Fedora developers are people, too -- please remember to show
> some respect.
"Be excellent to eachother"
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Our_Community
--
Ryan Rix
== http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://rix.si/ ==
signa
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>> components revision number .
>
> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
>
> I hope that RHEL 6 will be
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>
>>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those wh
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
>>>
>>> If you have a large codebase two months is barely enou
I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
conservative updates style replies... for the record:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
> I'd personally want to be able to _choose_ if and when I wa
> Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
> the time to make a system update to F12.
All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used to built the entire
Fedora tree. Suddenly bumping a GCC version wi
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 17:25:18 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >
> > +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> > to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
> > versions to F11.
+1
> Why? I don't
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >>
> >> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
> >> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gi
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
> 2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>>> components revision number .
>>
>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
>> 2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
>>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>>> in past 11
From what I see, to educate our users to actually test and provide
feedback is more laborious than educating our package maintainers. For
maintainers, discussions such as those that have occurred serve to
clarify, but I think in the case of users, it wouldn't be very painful
to insert one more scre
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
> Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
> of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
I had two ways:
1 update many packages in old distro
2 use previous stable Fedora, that fits
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>>
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
>> Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
>> of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
>
> RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
>
> I had two ways:
> 1 update many packages in old distro
2010/3/7 Henrique Junior :
> From what I see, to educate our users to actually test and provide
> feedback is more laborious than educating our package maintainers. For
> maintainers, discussions such as those that have occurred serve to
> clarify, but I think in the case of users, it wouldn't be v
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Debarshi Ray:
> > Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
> > the time to make a system update to F12.
>
> All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
> eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:32:42PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
> I don't really care for desktop programs here. If you want to upgrade
> X.org or OpenOffice - I probably don't notice it. But if you plan to
> upgrade things like python, php - it can be a problem for me.
>
On the python side,
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> >>
> >
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
2010/3/7 Toshio Kuratomi :
> One alternative that I have heard of that you might want to look into is
> RHEL5 plus packages from iuscommunity.org. As I understand it, they are
> trying to produce packages that you can install in parallel to the existing
> versions of certain programs (like pyhton
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:03:57PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> My reason to comment on those threads on devel list is really just that I
> want to retain the freedom to decide when my updates are ready to be
> released. I'm responsible for giving them adequate testing. Users
> expect the packa
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 11:02:46AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wr
On 03/07/2010 02:42 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
> wrote:
>> While we are at it, here is another great update:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>>
>> Â Â Â * New version introduced in F11
On Sunday 07 March 2010, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
> seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
> conservative updates style replies... for the record:
>
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > I'd
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 11:02:46 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> You can ask for
> removal from the buildroot override as soon as you are done building
> your package. In fact, Releng explicitly asks us to tell them when we
> are done so they can remove the override.
That's inconvenient and limiting. You can on
On Saturday 06 March 2010 19:38:16 Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/3/6 Naheem Zaffar :
> > 2010/3/6 Michał Piotrowski
> >
> >> Why I can install KDE 4.4 in F11 and I can't install latest gnome?
> >> (I'm just asking because I'm curious, not because I use Linux on
> >> desktop)
> >
> > I think fo
On Saturday 06 March 2010 23:48:23 Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 12:25 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >> +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> >> to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in
On 03/08/2010 11:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Major KDE update was in time of Fedora 9, so it's not an issue today.
>
> And this it the first problem - we should not call major, minor, bugfix
> release
> because it doesn't mean the same for every each app out in the wild!!!
Yes, it can get con
On Monday 08 March 2010 10:41:18 Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/08/2010 11:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Major KDE update was in time of Fedora 9, so it's not an issue today.
> >
> > And this it the first problem - we should not call major, minor, bugfix
> > release because it doesn't mean the sa
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>> Yes, it can get confusing. I think it was Kevin Kofler who suggested to
>> talk about "feature releases" vs. "bugfix releases" instead
>> to avoid confusion.
>
> Again you can't cut bugfixes from features :(
Again, you can't cut regressions from fea
Am Montag, den 08.03.2010, 12:27 +0200 schrieb Juha Tuomala:
> Again, you can't cut regressions from features :(
>
> To name few, your last push comes with:
> - kmail that can't anymore 'Add address to book'.
> - kaddressbook doesn't have 'Merge' feature anymore.
> - kaddressbook View, Edit, Tool
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 12:27:07PM +0200, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> >> Yes, it can get confusing. I think it was Kevin Kofler who suggested to
> >> talk about "feature releases" vs. "bugfix releases" instead
> >> to avoid confusion.
> >
> > Again yo
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:47 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
This is not the purpose of updates-testing, it is not an alternative
update repo. It is there for
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 22:17 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> And as you obviously didn't finish reading my sentence, that is not
> the only solution I proposed. Read again, there is a 0 additional repo
> proposal too.
Having multiple package versions in a single repository is essentially
like having
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
> confirm this. I thought that releng was asking for the overrides to be
> removed when the package was pushed to stable but I could be wrong.
>
https://fedoraproject
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:24:24PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
> > confirm this. I thought that releng was asking for the overrides to be
> > removed when the packa
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 16:32 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:24:24PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > > I can't find the wiki page documenting buildroot overrides so I can't
> > > confirm this. I thought that re
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 02:05:05PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 16:32 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > That's the page for releng's actions in response to a buildroot override
> > request. I'm looking for where it's documented when to ask for a buildroot
> > override, when
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:47 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those who want it.
>
> This is not the purpose of updates
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:28:39AM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > Moreover you also have the option of updating security fixes only.
>
> That option doesn't really exist, as was already demonstrated:
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/131926.html
S
86 matches
Mail list logo
