Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-20 Thread Matthew Miller
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 02:26:27PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Isn't bugzappers officially defunct? It does seem like a reasonable > > enough policy, for whatever that's worth. > > Yeah, the group is. We can have an exciting debate about whether we > consider that to mean the bug status

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 16:24 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:36:54AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > For the record, we do in fact have a policy on this: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_Severity > > I wouldn't exactly

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Matthew Miller
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:36:54AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > For the record, we do in fact have a policy on this: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_Severity > I wouldn't exactly claim that it's universally followed, but it *is* > there. I do still

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 12:47 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:36:54 -0700 > Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > > > For the record, we do in fact have a policy on this: > > > >

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:36:54 -0700 Adam Williamson wrote: > > For the record, we do in fact have a policy on this: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_Severity > > I wouldn't exactly claim that it's universally followed, but

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Adam Williamson
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 14:17 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:53:39AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > > > > > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > > > > > > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and > > > > it

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Matthew Miller
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:53:39AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and > > > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: > > > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Ter, 2016-04-19 at 10:53 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:20:51 +0100 > Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > > > > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review > > > and > >

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:20:51 +0100 Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and > > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: > > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Christopher Meng wrote: > On 4/17/16, Neal Gompa wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'd like to take over maintenance of the surf package for Fedora. > > Good luck with the name collision...Someone asked me to rename it to >

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Christopher Meng
On 4/17/16, Neal Gompa wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to take over maintenance of the surf package for Fedora. Good luck with the name collision...Someone asked me to rename it to surf-browser[1]. [1]---https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554101 -- Yours sincerely,

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 01:00:56PM -, Raphael Groner wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 01:20:51AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > Actually simply specifying '-x Check OwnDirs' as an argument to any > > fedora-review call also seems to work. > > > > Zbyszek > > Please explain how to

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Raphael Groner
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 01:20:51AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Actually simply specifying '-x Check OwnDirs' as an argument to any > fedora-review call also seems to work. > > Zbyszek Please explain how to validate manually the ownership guidelines, without the help from (slow) dnf

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-19 Thread Alexander Ploumistos
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Alexander Ploumistos >> wrote: >> >>> I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could >>> you >>> please explain the syntax of the

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through. I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you please explain the syntax of the first line? (%make_install

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 01:20:51AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and > > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: > > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538 >

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538 I already change priority and severity of #1279538 to urgent > *

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Neal Gompa
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through. > > I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you > please explain the syntax of the first line? > (%make_install

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Alexander Ploumistos
Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through. I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you please explain the syntax of the first line? (%make_install INSTALL="install -p") -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Neal Gompa
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and it seems > I'm hitting these two bugs: > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538 > * fedora-review queries too many times for

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Alexander Ploumistos
It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538 * fedora-review queries too many times for same thing #1275275 I'll try to stay up until it finishes and if that takes too long, I'll let

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Neal Gompa
Alexander, It should be fine now. I forgot to move it to the correct location. Silly me. On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:15 AM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > Hi Neal, > > The link to the source rpm in rhbz seems broken. > If nobody else comes forward by tonight, I'll pick

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-18 Thread Alexander Ploumistos
Hi Neal, The link to the source rpm in rhbz seems broken. If nobody else comes forward by tonight, I'll pick up the review. Best Regards -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Unretire surf

2016-04-17 Thread Neal Gompa
I've submitted a review request for unretiring surf: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327911 Could someone spare some time to review? On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to take over maintenance of the surf package for Fedora.

Unretire surf

2016-04-16 Thread Neal Gompa
Hello, I'd like to take over maintenance of the surf package for Fedora. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org