On Tue, 2018-12-18 at 15:16 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:10 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)
> >
> > Nothing happened last week .
> >
> > Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
> > https://src.fe
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:10 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)
>
> Nothing happened last week .
>
> Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-review please .
>
> My fas user is sergiomb ,
Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)
Nothing happened last week .
Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-review please .
My fas user is sergiomb , people want revert mock configurations of
RPMFusion because is not
On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 16:36 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Any news ?
> >
> > "But I guess nothing's getting released, for some reason? fedora-
> > review has been on version 0.6.1 since May 2016; all package
> > activity si
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Any news ?
>
> "But I guess nothing's getting released, for some reason? fedora-review has
> been on version 0.6.1 since May 2016; all package activity since then has
> been housekeeping rebuilds. "
>
> may you add me as admin to F
Hi,
Any news ?
"But I guess nothing's getting released, for some reason? fedora-review
has been on version 0.6.1 since May 2016; all package activity since
then has been housekeeping rebuilds. "
may you add me as admin to Fedora-review package ? to release a new
version .
Thanks
On Sat, 2018-08-
To answer your question solely because I don't like FUD driven phears monger
int discussions
RPM based depsolvers select packages based on heuristics, including what is
already installed.
Any malicious package that had Provides: glibc would most likely be ignored
because glibc is already insta
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 2:08 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
>
> While I agree that this is a good idea, I have one note of caution:
> What's to stop someone adding a malicious package which did something
> like ‘Provides: glibc’ and subsequently infects everyone's machine?
> I think we'd want to co
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 20:53 Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> While I agree that this is a good idea, I have one note of caution:
> What's to stop someone adding a malicious package which did something
> like ‘Provides: glibc’ and subsequently infects everyone's machine?
> I think we'd want to consid
While I agree that this is a good idea, I have one note of caution:
What's to stop someone adding a malicious package which did something
like ‘Provides: glibc’ and subsequently infects everyone's machine?
I think we'd want to consider the security implications of accepting
packages after only aut
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I'd *really* like to see us get to a point where package review is
> fully-automated. Basically we could just have a web-service that you pass a
> URL to an SRPM plus authenticate with your FAS account and it will perform
> all of the val
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 5:04 PM Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM Michal Novotny wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 5:04 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM Michal Novotny wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> f-r currently fails to build (#1603956), it has a bunch of bugs open [1]
>>> and many issue
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM Michal Novotny wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
>> f-r currently fails to build (#1603956), it has a bunch of bugs open [1]
>> and many issues and unhandled pull requests in the upstream repo [2,
14 matches
Mail list logo
