On 9/22/19 4:08 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 22. 09. 19 16:01, Till Hofmann wrote:
So the guidelines allow package retirement without any announcement on
devel. That's certainly unexpected, at least to me. I also don't think
this is a good idea, because maintainers of packages that depend on
On 22. 09. 19 16:01, Till Hofmann wrote:
So the guidelines allow package retirement without any announcement on devel.
That's certainly unexpected, at least to me. I also don't think this is a good
idea, because maintainers of packages that depend on the retired package are
still clueless
On 9/22/19 3:40 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 22. 09. 19 14:37, Till Hofmann wrote:
Hi all,
So I've just been notified that tolua++ has been retired, which is a
dependency of one of my packages (fawkes). BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1736911
I've closed this bug because it
On 22. 09. 19 15:40, Miro Hrončok wrote:
"7. A week before the mass branching, any packages which still have open FTBFS
bugs from the previous release will be retired."
Whether this is a reasonable thing or not has been discussed in:
On 22. 09. 19 14:37, Till Hofmann wrote:
Hi all,
So I've just been notified that tolua++ has been retired, which is a dependency
of one of my packages (fawkes). BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1736911
I've closed this bug because it "was already retired", not because of that
On 9/22/19 3:01 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
But I do have something to say about the specific example used. tolua++
being retired
is not a problem for fawkes, as fawkes depends on compat-tolua++, which
is maintained
by me and has NOT been retired.
Thanks for pointing this out! I assumed
Hi,
On 22-09-2019 14:37, Till Hofmann wrote:
Hi all,
So I've just been notified that tolua++ has been retired, which is a dependency
of one of my packages (fawkes). BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1736911
This would have been fine (as no action has been taken), if the
Hi all,
So I've just been notified that tolua++ has been retired, which is a
dependency of one of my packages (fawkes). BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1736911
This would have been fine (as no action has been taken), if the
automation had actually followed the FTBFS
