mohanboddu opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
Fedora Minimal Compose for OpenQA testing
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/598
kellin opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
Add post-compose rsync script
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/438
walters opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
WIP: Add fedora-atomic-ws config
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/502
tstellar reported a new issue against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
The i686 packages for compiler-rt are no longer available in the x86_64 repositories starting with Fedora 27. Could you mark this package as multilb.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513286
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/501
dustymabe opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
cloud: remove s390x from image builds
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/731
kellin reported a new issue against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following:
``
The way we rsync composes today is a one-liner bash script that is not very durable and requires that a release engineer babysit it through the entire four hour rsync process.
I am going to make this more durable, however, it will also slightly change our process behind the scenes.
Today if a process works or is DOOMED after a full run it is assigned an RC release number. (EG: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc). If the compose fails quickly from something such as a failure to have signed packages then it will not be assigned a release candidate.
Per @mohanboddu there is not a durable way to identify the all of the different ways the special case DOOMed composes occur so they will be assigned an RC number after the automation is deployed.
The only visible change will be extra gaps in the RC composes in /pub/alt/stage that represent these extra numbers being inserted to the sequence.
@mohanboddu is fine with this change; does anyone else have objections?
@ausil , @kevin , @puiterwijk please let me know. The initial script PR will be coming within the next two business days.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/426
huzaifas reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
We need to implement the new Fedora Security policy as per:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapr…
"If a CRITICAL or IMPORTANT security issue is currently open against a package, or a security issue of lower severity has been open for at least 6 months, four weeks before the branch point a procedure similar to long-standing FTBFS will be triggered immediately, with 8 weeks of weekly notifications to maintainers and subsequent orphaning and then subsequent removal from distribution. This applies to all packages, not just leaf."
So before 4 weeks before the branch point, we need to ensure that:
1. Packages which have any pending critical or important security flaws open ie:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=urgent&bug_severity=hi…
are marked for FTBS and not built.
2. Packages which have any <important flaws open for atleast 6 months or more ie:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=urgent&bug_severity=hi…
are marked for FTBS and not build.
* When do you need this? 2019-01-01 - Much before the last branch point.
* If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact?
Fedora 30 will ship lot of insecure packages. Major issue for the release.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7793
churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
1. I've create a new repository request, where something was wrong
2. @limb processed the request, closed as invalid
3. I fixed the thing and reopened the issue
4. @limb processed the request, closed as invalid again (already exists)
5. as a result, the repo was created, but owned by @limb
This is probably broken in some script that @limb runs, it probably creates the repo, checks some constraints and assigns the repo to me. When the constraints fail, the repo exists, but is not assigned to me. I cannot provide more details, because I have no idea what happens "on the other side".
This already happened twice to me:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/10716https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/13178
In both cases, the branch was set to epel7 and initial_commit to false, if that makes any difference.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8468
ignatenkobrain reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
* Describe the issue
Today we've encountered issue that if your modulemd contains something like
```yaml
- buildrequires:
platform: [f29]
requires:
platform: []
```
MBS doesn't tag it properly into f28-* because it checks for buildrequires and not for requires. Which is wrong: https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/974
However, @puiterwijk mentioned that bodhi doesn't support this either because it would pick first tag instead of creating updates for multiple ones. It seems that bodhi would need to change some core parts for this.
I'm submitting this ticket just to make sure that work is scoped and if can't be completed before F29 bodhi activation point, could be workarounded.
* When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD)
F29 Bodhi activation point.
* When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD)
When modularity dies.
* If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact?
One of the main use-cases for modularity doesn't work.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7662
kumarpraveen reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
I am part of minishift[0] development team and currently, we only have support for CentOS and RHEL live iso to provision Openshift locally, we also want to add support for Fedora iso so people can try the latest development around container world.
As a starting point we only first try the scratch build of the iso with f28/f29/rawhide.
```
$ klist
Ticket cache: KEYRING:persistent:1000:1000
Default principal: kumarpraveen(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG
Valid starting Expires Service principal
06/08/2018 12:31:28 06/09/2018 12:28:38 HTTP/koji.fedoraproject.org(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG
renew until 06/15/2018 12:28:32
06/08/2018 12:28:38 06/09/2018 12:28:38 krbtgt/FEDORAPROJECT.ORG(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG
renew until 06/15/2018 12:28:32
$ koji spin-livecd --scratch minishift-fedora 1.0.0 rawhide x86_64 fedora.ks
spin-livecd is deprecated and will be replaced with spin-livemedia
[====================================] 100% 00:00:00 19.70 KiB 33.12 KiB/sec
ActionNotAllowed: livecd permission required
```
[0] https://github.com/minishift/minishift
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7555