No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220131.0):
ID: 1116930 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
The criteria looks good to me, but I agree that it might be a double edged
sword to say that *The package manager must never make the system enter an
inconsistent or unbootable state* as suggested. An explanatory note is also
a good thing to have. However I am not convinced that the wording needs t
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220131.0):
ID: 1116946 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
Hi folks! Was wondering if any packager would be able to do a quick
package review for me:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2049236
It's a relatively small and simple package so it shouldn't be too hard,
though it's slightly unusual both in terms of what it does and how it
doe
On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 11:38:41AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks! Was wondering if any packager would be able to do a quick
> package review for me:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2049236
>
> It's a relatively small and simple package so it shouldn't be too ha
