On 13.08.2019 20:01, Adam Williamson wrote:
> This is true, but that's not a reason to stop doing package reviews.
> "Things aren't perfect" is never a good excuse for "...so we can make
> them worse!"
I never asked to stop doing package reviews. Package review is a good
thing. I just asked to
Hey guys, I just saw this so sorry for the late reply.
I'm still around. I haven't been contacted but I see no problems with
moving away from compton in an orderly fashion.
Feel free to take over if you want. :)
Regards,
Abhiram K
On Tue, 13 Aug, 2019, 11:32 PM Adam Williamson,
wrote:
> On
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 18:42 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 13.08.2019 18:34, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > And yet this thread demonstrates that without good review, we will get
> > garbage packages. Review processes exist for a reason.
>
> Every package can become a garbage, because
> Review processes exist for a reason.
Review processes is one of the best thing in Fedora and i believe this helps
with packaging quality overall. The problem is no one literally wanted to do
this in Fedora since 99% of packages reviewing one person which i mentioned
already before there.
> I see plenty of names in Bugzilla doing package reviews. If you’ve
> waited a long time, this list is one place to ask for them (review
> swaps for extra points).
This guy probably didn't know about that since he still trying to push it since
2014
On 13.08.2019 18:34, Adam Williamson wrote:
> And yet this thread demonstrates that without good review, we will get
> garbage packages. Review processes exist for a reason.
Every package can become a garbage, because after package review no one
reviews it again. I see lots of legacy packages,
I can suggest following:
1. Do review process much more easier by running Fedora Review Tool on
Koji using fedpkg. Output can be sent to email for additional manual checks.
2. Do package revocation procedure from non-responsive maintainers much
more simple and easier. Currently we need to wait 3
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 18:31 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 13.08.2019 16:52, Ernestas Kulik wrote:
> > No need to get defensive about this. Provide feedback ahead of time
> > and, preferably, help out. Replacing tooling is not just flipping a
> > switch.
>
> But he was right. Review
On 13.08.2019 16:52, Ernestas Kulik wrote:
> No need to get defensive about this. Provide feedback ahead of time
> and, preferably, help out. Replacing tooling is not just flipping a
> switch.
But he was right. Review process in openSUSE is much more easier, than
in Fedora. Currently no one want
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 13:51 +, Artem Tim wrote:
> Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person
> reviewing and help witch packaging - eclipseo. Many thanks to him.
I see plenty of names in Bugzilla doing package reviews. If you’ve
waited a long time, this list is one place to
On Tuesday, 13 August 2019 15:51:41 CEST Artem Tim wrote:
> Fixed
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton-ng/blob/master/f/compton-ng.spec
>
>
> > How did it pass review?
>
>
> Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person reviewing and
> help witch packaging - eclipseo.
Fixed
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton-ng/blob/master/f/compton-ng.spec
> How did it pass review?
Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person reviewing and help
witch packaging - eclipseo. Many thanks to him.
Also no one want to wait for month+ and pinging non
On 8/13/19 1:38 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:22:17 PM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
>
> How did it pass review?
>
>> Obsoletes: compton
>
> Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
> without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
> Really?
This was
On 13.08.2019 12:38, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> So you want to use -flto=auto
Supported only by GCC 10+.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:22:17 PM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> >> On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
> >
> > How did it pass review?
> >
> >
> >> Obsoletes: compton
> >
> >
> > Silently doing Obsoletes of an active
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
Really?
cp -a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
> Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
Really?
> cp -a
20 matches
Mail list logo
