Please ignore the previous version of this mail: I was typing it in
webmail instead of Evolution as usual, and wound up sending it by
mistake before it was complete.
As always, minutes and IRC transcript available on the wiki at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130701
Next meeting
As always, minutes and IRC transcript available on the wiki at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130701
Next meeting is scheduled for 2013-07-08 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
If you have topics you think we should bring up at the
meeting, please add them to the Wiki page at
https://f
On 07/04/2013 09:10 AM, 卢海涛 wrote:
I made a USB device, and could boot up into the install application, but when
to choose a device as install source , the sdb1 device, USB disk, verified to
be not available , what is the reason , how should i do and do I have to make
DVD disk to install?
Forgot to mention this at the time, but I put up the F20 blocker and
freeze exception tracker bugs a couple of days back.
The old-style aliases (F20Alpha, F20Beta, F20Blocker etc) are no longer
in use: I only created the new-style aliases. All the bug numbers and
aliases are listed at
https:/
> I made a USB device, and could boot up into the install application,
> but when to choose a device as install source , the sdb1 device, USB disk,
> verified to be not available , what is the reason ,
> how should i do and do I have to make DVD disk to install?
Here is one method that I use when
The following Fedora 17 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
364
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-10269/revelation-0.4.14-1.fc17
176
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0455/fedora-business-cards-1-0.1.beta1.fc17
104
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/up
On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 11:47 +1000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Looks like something similar has already been requested:
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/718
Getting back on topic, I propose the wiki page be modified to say that
karma only depends on whether the package update works or not,
irre
Any screenshots from your camera?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 11:26 +1000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> I have no idea how easy or difficult it is to implement this, but I
> can
> open a ticket with infra and at least get their take on it.
Looks like something similar has already been requested:
https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/718
--
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 14:45 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2013-07-04 6:36, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> This is the result of a currently-active thread on devel@:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-June/184641.html
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/20
On 2013-07-04 6:36, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi,
I've run into a few updates that have been given negative karma because
they were missing update descriptions. While I understand that
maintainers should provide proper update messages, I hardly think an
update should be given negative karma for this. T
On 2013-07-04 2:23, Kamil Paral wrote:
Hi folks! Taking into account the feedback on the first draft of the
revised criteria, I've updated the draft page with a few changes:
Here's the diff:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AAdamwill%2FDraft_final_criteria_sandbox&diff=343808&o
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 00:09:54 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> Well, I hate writing descriptions for new package.
Hmmm ... the definition of "new package" is different.
It refers to a new package approved during package review. ;-)
For an ordinary update you refer to, you should try to sum up the
>Well, I hate writing descriptions for new package.
>But this "catanzaro" still gave me -1 to the update.
>You can email me with the issue and I can edit, but -1 is not good.
Completely agree
>Sure it should, the update is defective. The description isn't optional
it should, only when the bug
Well, I hate writing descriptions for new package.
But this "catanzaro" still gave me -1 to the update.
You can email me with the issue and I can edit, but -1 is not good.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
I made a USB device, and could boot up into the install application, but when
to choose a device as install source , the sdb1 device, USB disk, verified to
be not available , what is the reason , how should i do and do I have to make
DVD disk to install?
发自我的 iPad
在 2013-7-4，20:00，test-requ.
On 4 July 2013 14:36, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> I hardly think an update should be given negative karma for this.
Sure it should, the update is defective. The description isn't optional.
Richard.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 04/07/2013 17:09, Ankur Sinha a écrit :
> On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 14:51 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> How does a reporter supposed to know which bugs are fixed if
>> there is no update description?
>
> One can specify what bugs an update f
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 14:51 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> How does a reporter supposed to know which bugs are fixed if there is
> no
> update description?
One can specify what bugs an update fixes in Bodhi. These bugs are
closed when the update goes stable, and these bugs are listed bot
On 07/04/2013 01:36 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
I've run into a few updates that have been given negative karma because
they were missing update descriptions.
How does a reporter supposed to know which bugs are fixed if there is no
update description?
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedorapro
On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 11:37 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2013-07-03 1:47, Cristian Sava wrote:
> > I have a server with two NICs (on-board and attached).
> > HW: ASRock H67M-GE + I3-2120 + 8GB + 1TB (hdd, sata)
>
> > 1) Why "route" shows iface=p4p1, p5p1 instead enp4s0, enp5s0 ?
>
> This wi
Hi,
I've run into a few updates that have been given negative karma because
they were missing update descriptions. While I understand that
maintainers should provide proper update messages, I hardly think an
update should be given negative karma for this. This has happened before
and iirc, it was
Compose started at Thu Jul 4 08:15:02 UTC 2013
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[avgtime]
avgtime-0-0.6.git20130201.fc20.x86_64 requires
libphobos-ldc.so.60()(64bit)
[derelict]
derelict-tcod-3-20.20130626gite70c293.fc20.i686 requir
On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 11:37 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2013-07-03 1:47, Cristian Sava wrote:
> > I have a server with two NICs (on-board and attached).
> > HW: ASRock H67M-GE + I3-2120 + 8GB + 1TB (hdd, sata)
>
> > 1) Why "route" shows iface=p4p1, p5p1 instead enp4s0, enp5s0 ?
>
> This wi
> Hi folks! Taking into account the feedback on the first draft of the
> revised criteria, I've updated the draft page with a few changes:
Here's the diff:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AAdamwill%2FDraft_final_criteria_sandbox&diff=343808&oldid=340486
Looks good to me.
> I'd
25 matches
Mail list logo
