On 01. 05. 20 20:32, Troy Dawson wrote:
I've never un-updated anything, and I'm not sure if it will make it
possible for your packages to be pushed to stable.
It wont. Just please make sure my commit eventually gets pushed in some update
and that there is a buildroot override until that
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 9:36 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 14. 04. 20 19:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 14. 04. 20 18:46, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >> Yep, I'm having a hard time finding anything relevant to test.
> >> I have verified it doesn't conflict with any other rpm macro, but I'm
> >> pretty
On 14. 04. 20 19:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 14. 04. 20 18:46, Troy Dawson wrote:
Yep, I'm having a hard time finding anything relevant to test.
I have verified it doesn't conflict with any other rpm macro, but I'm
pretty sure you had already checked that.
So, I'm giving it a thumbs up.
And I'll
On 14. 04. 20 18:46, Troy Dawson wrote:
Yep, I'm having a hard time finding anything relevant to test.
I have verified it doesn't conflict with any other rpm macro, but I'm
pretty sure you had already checked that.
So, I'm giving it a thumbs up.
And I'll give it a thumbs up on the pull requests
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:27 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 14. 04. 20 17:40, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:30 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14. 04. 20 15:56, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >>> Hi Miro,
> >>> I've taken a look, but haven't done any testing.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
>
On 14. 04. 20 17:40, Troy Dawson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:30 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 14. 04. 20 15:56, Troy Dawson wrote:
Hi Miro,
I've taken a look, but haven't done any testing.
Thanks.
EPEL6 patch - no. Even if it works, I'd say no. We're at the last 7
months before EOL
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:30 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 14. 04. 20 15:56, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > Hi Miro,
> > I've taken a look, but haven't done any testing.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > EPEL6 patch - no. Even if it works, I'd say no. We're at the last 7
> > months before EOL and I don't want the
On 14. 04. 20 15:56, Troy Dawson wrote:
Hi Miro,
I've taken a look, but haven't done any testing.
Thanks.
EPEL6 patch - no. Even if it works, I'd say no. We're at the last 7
months before EOL and I don't want the EPEL6 stuff to have changes
like this. I could be outvoted by this, but I
Hi Miro,
I've taken a look, but haven't done any testing.
EPEL6 patch - no. Even if it works, I'd say no. We're at the last 7
months before EOL and I don't want the EPEL6 stuff to have changes
like this. I could be outvoted by this, but I believe most of the
other EPEL packagers would feel
On 14. 04. 20 13:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Miro.
EPEL is interested in Fedora compatibility but has 0 people staffed to it. I
got slammed by the datacentre move and dropped the ball on this. Troy took over
for me last month and has been trying to catch up on all the things we have
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 06:08, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 02. 01. 20 15:36, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Hey EPEL experts. Could you please have a look at:
> >
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/13
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/14
>
On 02. 01. 20 15:36, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hey EPEL experts. Could you please have a look at:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/13
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/14
Thanks.
Is EPEL interested in Fedora compatibility? Or shall I
Hey EPEL experts. Could you please have a look at:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/13
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/14
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/pull-request/40
Thanks.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone:
om/show_bug.cgi?id=1663037
>
> They're very small, very simple packages. Should take about a minute to
> review.
>
> Will trade reviews or other packaging favors.
>
I'll grab these. In the near future, I will have reviews needed for
getting Cavil into Fedora...
--
真実はいつ
When I wasn't looking, asymptote grew a new dependency, which means I
have two new packages that need reviews.
python-speg: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663036
python-cson: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663037
They're very small, very simple packages. Should take
These new components came out of perl-Mail-Box at 3.000. I need them
reviewed to update Mail::Box.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420099
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420100
~tom
==
Red Hat
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Hi
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I have some python packages that need reviewing:
python-traitsui -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/**show_bug.cgi?id=829580https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829580
python-envisage -
I have some python packages that need reviewing:
python-traitsui - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829580
python-envisage - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958523
There may be more to come in the dep chain as well. These are needed to
repair the broken Mayavi
I'm building netcdf 4.2-rc2 in rawhide now. This splits out the C++ and
Fortran APIs into separate packages. Not sure I have time to do a swap, but I
need the following reviews done:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742605 - netcdf-cxx4
On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 20:13 +0200, Mario Blättermann wrote:
Am 27.06.2011 20:03, schrieb Ankur Sinha:
Hello,
I've recently been packaging applications for the fedora medical
initiative. There are quite a few of them. If you have some time to
spare, please review a few (or just one).
Am 27.06.2011 20:03, schrieb Ankur Sinha:
Hello,
I've recently been packaging applications for the fedora medical
initiative. There are quite a few of them. If you have some time to
spare, please review a few (or just one). Even if you're not a sponsored
packager, I encourage you to please
On 2011-06-06 11:17, Tom Callaway wrote:
As usual, I will swap reviews or favors (within limits) for reviews on
some new packages for me:
mono-reflection:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711181
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
gambas3:
Tom Callaway wrote:
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
SARCASMOh great, because a tool to parasite wireless connections which the
owners went out of the way to secure with the best available protocol is
EXACTLY what we need…/SARCASM
Use of this tool is probably against
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 03:12:19PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Tom Callaway wrote:
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
SARCASMOh great, because a tool to parasite wireless connections which the
owners went out of the way to secure with the best available protocol is
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 03:12:19PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Tom Callaway wrote:
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
SARCASMOh great, because a tool to parasite wireless connections which the
owners went out of the way to secure with the best available protocol is
On 06/07/2011 12:29 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 03:12:19PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Tom Callaway wrote:
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
SARCASMOh great, because a tool to parasite wireless connections which the
owners went out of the way
As usual, I will swap reviews or favors (within limits) for reviews on
some new packages for me:
mono-reflection:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711181
pyrit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691894
gambas3:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203
As soon as
27 matches
Mail list logo
