devel-announce February 2011

devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
10 discussions

Fedora 15 Alpha to slip by one week
by Robyn Bergeron 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Today at the Go/No-Go meeting[1] we decided to slip the Alpha by one week. The slip is due to a blocker bug affecting a number of non-US keyboard layouts, including German and French[2], which does not currently have a fix or a reasonable workaround. All other blocker bugs are currently in VERIFIED, or alternately, have workarounds documented in F15_Common_bugs. At this time, we are not adjusting later milestone dates. We will continue with the F15 Alpha readiness meeting tomorrow, as previously announced on the logistics mailing list, and will have another F15 Alpha Blocker Bug meeting Friday. Thanks for your understanding. We will meet again next week for another GO/NO-GO meeting. -Robyn [1] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-02-23/fedora-meeting.2… [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676827

1 0

PolicyKit authentication agent changes
by Matthias Clasen 23 Feb '11

23 Feb '11

As of version 0.100 (which will land in F15 as a post-alpha update), the polkit-gnome package will no longer install an autostart file for polkit-gnome-authentication-agent-1. Instead, each desktop environment is reponsible for making sure that an authentication agent is running. For GNOME, this is done by gnome-session installing an autostart file with OnlyShowIn=GNOME;. Other desktop environments that rely on polkit-gnome need to do something similar.

1 0

New path available for joining the Fedora package maintainers group
by Kevin Fenzi 23 Feb '11

23 Feb '11

Greetings. FESCo has added an additional path to becoming a co-maintainer of an existing package in the Fedora package collection for folks who are not currently in the packager group. Traditionally, you would gain sponsorship by submitting a new package you create and demonstrating your understanding of the guidelines and processes from the review process. This new path requires you to convince an existing maintainer to mentor you in the processes and guidelines of package maintenance, and would allow you to be sponsored by FESCo or an existing sponsor to co-maintain those package(s) with your mentor guiding you. Please see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group For the full description and process for this path to becoming a package maintainer. kevin

1 0

notification-daemon autostart changes
by Matthias Clasen 22 Feb '11

22 Feb '11

I'm going to build notification-daemon 0.7.1 as an F15 update; this release changes the way the daemon is started. In the past, it was bus activated on the session bus and exited after some idle time. This was causing a race condition with gnome-shell taking the same bus name at session start to support notifications. Starting with 0.7.1, the notification daemon is no longer bus activated, and does not exit on its own. Desktop environments that use it to provide notifications have to ensure it gets started in some way; gnome-session will start it as a required component of the fallback session. Matthias

1 0

Fedora 15 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting Wednesday, February 23, 2011 @ 22:00 UTC
by Robyn Bergeron 21 Feb '11

21 Feb '11

Join us on irc.freenode.net #fedora-meeting for this important meeting. Wednesday, February 23, 2011 @22:00 UTC (17:00 EST/14:00 PST) "Before each public release Development, QA and Release Engineering meet to determine if the release criteria are met for a particular release. This meeting is called the: Go/No-Go Meeting." "Verifying that the Release criteria are met is the responsibility of the QA Team." For more details about this meeting see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting In the meantime, keep an eye on the Fedora 15 Alpha Blocker list: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=657616&hide_resolved=1 Talk to you Wednesday! -Robyn

1 0

Alpha Release Notes Prep
by Zach Oglesby 20 Feb '11

20 Feb '11

The docs team is preparing the Alpha release notes, we would like to ask that developers check their feature pages[1] to make sure it contains the most up to date information. We use these pages to create the release notes so it's important that the information is up to date, and no one knows about developing features more than the developers themselves. We appreciate your help and the time spent making Fedora so great. Thanks! [1]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/15/FeatureList -- Zach Oglesby GPG Key: F20C4707 zoglesby on irc.freenode.net https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Zoglesby

1 0

Mass Rebuild and Mass branching status update
by Dennis Gilmore 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

The first pass though the mass rebuild has been completed failures can be found at http://ausil.fedorapeople.org/failed.html and the list of all things not built yet at http://ausil.fedorapeople.org/rebuild.html there is ~400 packages that rpm-4.9.0 failed to parse the spec files. the couple ive looked at so far are due to unsupported macro use. We have also mass branched everything. you will now need to use bodhi to push updates in. Thanks for your paitence, please bring up any issues that you see. Dennis

1 0

Mass rebuild starting monday Feb 7
by Dennis Gilmore 06 Feb '11

06 Feb '11

Hi all, for gcc-4.6, xz compression changes, and to a lesser extent we will be doing a mass rebuild starting monday. it will be done in a side tag with a lower than normal priority so that you can still submit builds and not have to wait for the mass rebuild to finish. we will then tag into rawhide the builds after unless you do a build in the meantime Please note that mass branching will be occuring soon after the mass rebuild as the Alpha freeze is 2011-02-15 Thanks Dennis and the rest of rel eng

2 1

[Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines
by Tom Callaway 04 Feb '11

04 Feb '11

Here are the latest set of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines: --- The rules for substituting dots with dashes in package names have been clarified to make explicit that they apply to python modules and that they do not apply to version numbers in compat libraries. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines --- Many implementations of md5 originate in a program and then end up copied to other programs with compatible license terms. These implementations have been granted a bundling exception. The usual requirement to set a Virtual Provides: if bundling are in effect and have some special notes due to the many implementations out there. Note that copying the implementation from a library is not covered under this exception. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Packages_gran… --- rpm and yum treat a dependency on a package of the form Requires: foo as being fulfilled by any available package foo, regardless of arch. On multilib architectures, this means that there are often two packages with the same name: one for each of the multilib arches. When yum is asked to satisfy a dependency for that package name it could pull in the package for the wrong arch. This happens when the correct architecture is not available to yum. That might be the case if, due to some malfunction, the Fedora repositories are out of synch. It can also happen if a user has installed a package that is treated as "newer" than the corresponding package in the currently enabled set of repositories; in attempting to resolve otherwise-unresolvable dependency chains, yum may decide to pull in the dependency chain for a different arch. In some situations, this is not a problem, but there are some situations where it does matter: * A library that is explicitly Required (example a dlopen'd library) * The dependency from one -devel packages that is not noarch to another -devel package. * A non-noarch subpackage's dependency on its main package or another subpackage (e.g., libfoo-devel depends on libfoo, or fooapp-plugins depends on foo-app). The Packaging Guidelines (and Naming Guidelines) have been amended to reflect that %{?_isa} must be used for Explicit Requires and Provides that match those situations. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requires http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplac… --- Previously, there was a change made to the Documentation guidelines which stated that: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. In addition, %doc files must not have executable permissions. This has been revised to: Files marked as documentation must not cause the package to pull in more dependencies than it would without the documentation. One simple way to ensure this is to remove all executable permissions from %doc files (chmod -x). Also, if a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the packaged application(s). To summarize: If it is in %doc, the included programs must run properly if it is not present. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation --- A new section has been added to the Packaging Guidelines concerning test suites included with source code: If the source code of the package provides a test suite, it should be executed in the %check section, whenever it is practical to do so. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Test_Suites --- A new section has been added to the Packaging Guidelines concerning the proper packaging of tmpfiles.d configurations and directories: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d --- These guidelines (and changes) were approved by the Fedora Packaging Committee (FPC). Many thanks to Jochen Schmitt and all of the members of the FPC, for assisting in drafting, refining, and passing these guidelines. As a reminder: The Fedora Packaging Guidelines are living documents! If you find something missing, incorrect, or in need of revision, you can suggest a draft change. The procedure for this is documented here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee#GuidelineChangeProcedure Thanks, ~spot

1 0

Fedora GNOME 3 Test Day #1 coming up tomorrow
by Adam Williamson 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

QA and Desktop teams are running three Test Days to test out GNOME 3 ahead of F15 (and GNOME 3.0) releases, and the first is tomorrow! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-02-03_GNOME3_Alpha Please come along and help test - there will be live images so you won't need a Rawhide installation, the testing will be easy, and you don't have to do every single test - you can help out even with ten or fifteen minutes (plus the time to download and burn an image). Please note that right now the wiki page is in considerable flux - I have to write a whole bunch of test cases which aren't up there yet - and desktop team are in the middle of trying to land GNOME 2.91.6 in Rawhide, so please hold off on testing for now, we should have everything in order by tomorrow morning. If you're busy tomorrow, you can certainly come by and do the tests later - all you'll miss is the IRC communication, but you can do all the testing based on the Wiki page. IRC channel is #fedora-test-day on Freenode. Please grab me if you have any questions or suggestions! Thanks everyone. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

devel-announce February 2011