Hi,
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 05:27:37 +0200
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
Upstreams, yes, but not Fedora. Fedora should be self-hosted.
Can you please define
On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 05:27:37 +0200
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
Upstreams, yes, but not Fedora. Fedora should be self-hosted.
Can you please define Fedora and self-hosted as you use them above?
A domain 100 operated and owned by
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 07:02:51 PM Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/20/2015 06:00 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:55:01 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I share this view. I refuse to create a github account and do not
consider
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 01:56:02 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Theres a bunch of tools out there to export issues from github
They can turn this off at any moment, leaving you with no way to get
your data out.
Yep. This is the case for any project using
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 05:27:37 +0200
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
Upstreams, yes, but not Fedora. Fedora should be self-hosted.
Can you please define Fedora and self-hosted as you use them above?
Fedora is part of the larger open source community.
Fedora Infrastructure uses 100%
On 08/20/2015 07:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Well, I don't know if there was a Big Philosophical Discussion, but in
practice all kinds of Fedora-ish stuff has its upstream in github these
days, so yes, clearly times have changed.
That's not the point. I am talking about separating Fedora
On 08/20/2015 06:00 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:55:01 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I share this view. I refuse to create a github account and do not
consider using any external account resources for Fedora to be
acceptable.
While I
On 08/20/2015 09:51 AM, Milan Crha wrote:
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 21:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
There will likely be oddities and bugs. Please file them in github so
we can prioritize them and get them fixed up.
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues
Hi,
I do not have a github
On 20/08/15 10:28, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/20/2015 09:51 AM, Milan Crha wrote:
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 21:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
There will likely be oddities and bugs. Please file them in github so
we can prioritize them and get them fixed up.
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 21:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
There will likely be oddities and bugs. Please file them in github so
we can prioritize them and get them fixed up.
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues
Hi,
I do not have a github account, and I'm currently not going to
On 08/20/2015 07:51 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:33:37 -0500
Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is inacceptable,
This applies to github, sourceforge, farcebook, nitter,
On 08/20/2015 12:00 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 20/08/15 10:28, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/20/2015 09:51 AM, Milan Crha wrote:
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 21:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
There will likely be oddities and bugs. Please file them in github so
we can prioritize them and get them fixed
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 00:39:20 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Paul W. Frields wrote:
This is correct. The infra team discussed this some time ago and
since Github does nothing to lock up the resources we care about,
So you'd only see lock-in to proprietary infrastructure
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Theres a bunch of tools out there to export issues from github
They can turn this off at any moment, leaving you with no way to get your
data out.
and exposes our code to a much wider (*1000 at least) group of
developers,
If a developer wants to contribute to Fedora
On Friday, August 21, 2015, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
vs.
1'. clone the upstream repository,
2'. commit your change(s) to the clone,
3'. export your patch(es) with git format-patch,
4'. open an issue through a web interface,
5'. attach the patch(es) to the issue
(except of
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 12:33 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is
inacceptable,
This applies to github, sourceforge, farcebook, nitter, goggle, or
else - period.
The last time a
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:33:37 -0500
Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is inacceptable,
This applies to github, sourceforge, farcebook, nitter, goggle, or
else - period.
The last
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is inacceptable,
This applies to github, sourceforge, farcebook, nitter, goggle, or else -
period.
The last time a non-Fedora hosted / closed source service was suggested it was shot
down.
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 12:33 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is
inacceptable,
This applies to github, sourceforge, farcebook, nitter, goggle, or
else - period.
The last time a
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 11:00 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
Looks like you need to hit enter after typing/pasting in the
package NVR into the Candidate Builds field, which was not at all
obvious to me.
Hi,
thanks for the hint. That made it work, the package name is repeated
below the
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
IMHO, I think projects should be free to choose whatever tools they
wish to build their project. You are of course free to choose to not
use that application/project based on that or other factors.
Closed source applications are not something we ever want to run in
Fedora
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 22:24:18 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
But this is a project where Fedora *is* upstream!
I assume you mean bodhi by this.
The primary bodhi developers are heavily involved in Fedora, but are
also involved in other communities. When is a project Fedora ?
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:40:40AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 12:33 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 08/20/2015 12:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
To me any non fedora/redhat supplied account system is
inacceptable,
This applies to github,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 02:40:10PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 22:24:18 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
But this is a project where Fedora *is* upstream!
I assume you mean bodhi by this.
The primary bodhi developers are heavily involved in Fedora,
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:55:01 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I share this view. I refuse to create a github account and do not
consider using any external account resources for Fedora to be
acceptable.
While I do have a GitHub account (no way for
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I share this view. I refuse to create a github account and do not
consider using any external account resources for Fedora to be acceptable.
While I do have a GitHub account (no way for me to eschew it, sadly), I also
do not understand why (and am sad that) Bodhi
Paul W. Frields wrote:
This is correct. The infra team discussed this some time ago and
since Github does nothing to lock up the resources we care about,
So you'd only see lock-in to proprietary infrastructure as a problem if they
were actively locking things up?
Even if now, everything can
27 matches
Mail list logo
