August 2019 - rel-eng - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[releng] Issue #8569: Side tag for llvm rebase in Rawhide

by Tom Stellard

tstellar reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue We need a side tag (f31-llvm) for the upcoming llvm rebase in Fedora * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) 07/29/2019 * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) 08/29/2019 * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? Temporary breakage in rawhide when the LLVM rebase occurs. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8569

1 week, 2 days

3
7
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #7793: Implement new Fedora Security policy for retiring packages with security bugs

by Huzaifa Sidhpurwala

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.fedora... "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=... 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=... 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

1 week, 3 days

5
12
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8624: Unretire mingw-libsoup

by Kalev Lember

kalev reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` mingw-libsoup got retired in the recent FTBFS cleanup. Please unretire it and unblock in f31. I'll take care of fixing the FTBFS. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8624

1 week, 3 days

3
7
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8664: Module mass-rebuild for F32 Rawhide needed

by Stephen Gallagher

sgallagh reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue At the Branch point, we need to perform a mass-rebuild of modular content so that they can be rebuilt against the new base module (in this case `platform:f32`). This does not seem to have happened during the F31 Branch from Rawhide, as https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-2019082... shows only those modules whose maintainers have done a manual rebuild since the Branch. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) Immediately (2019-08-21) * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) When F32 goes EOL * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? Upgrade path on Rawhide will be broken for anyone with modules enabled. (That means pretty much everyone at this point). CC @kevin `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8664

1 week, 3 days

4
11
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8702: F31 stable push requests

by Adam Williamson

adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` This ticket will be used for requesting pushes of tested blocker / freeze exception fixes during F31 release freezes. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process . Similar to candidate compose request tickets, this ticket can be closed by releng after each push and re-opened by QA each time a new push is needed. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8702

1 week, 3 days

3
35
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8684: Create F32FTBFS and F32FailsToInstall Bugzilla trackers

by Miro Hrončok

churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue According to the Fails to build and Fails to install policy, we need new Buzgilla trackers for Fedora 32. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fai... * When do you need this? After Fedora 31 was branched (already happened). * When is this no longer needed or useful? When Fedora 32 goes EOL. * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? We cannot properly track F32 install and build failures. ---- I know I can create the bugizllas myself, but last time i did, it created confusion during teh mass rebuild. So I'd prefer if releng creates them. It also looks better if the trackers are created by the releng account. Thanks `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8684

1 week, 4 days

1
3
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8468: fedora-scm-requests new repository procedure repeatedly keeps the repo owned by the releng person

by Miro Hrončok

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/10716 https://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

1 week, 4 days

2
4
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8598: Switch the FTBFS reminders to F31FTBFS

by Miro Hrončok

churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` Please update the configuration of the weekly FTBFS bugzilla reminder to start notifying the Fedora 31 bugs. Thanks. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8598

1 week, 4 days

2
4
0 / 0

[pungi-fedora] Issue #759: Use of `dracut*` in `additional_packages` pulls in some unneccessary (and broken) stuff

by Adam Williamson

adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following: `` See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1734179 . That's a Fedora 31 blocker because an uninstallable package gets pulled into the Server DVD...but the package probably doesn't really need to be on the DVD at all. It's being included because in `fedora.conf` we list `dracut*` in `additional_packages`, which pulls in not just all the subpackages of the dracut .src.rpm itself but various other packages whose name starts with `dracut`, some of which we probably don't really want to pull in at all. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/759

1 week, 4 days

3
9
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8713: Unretire ipsilon

by Neal Gompa

ngompa reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Name of the package? `ipsilon` * FAS username of the new maintainer? `ngompa` * Branches that you need it to be unretired for? `f31`, `master` * Package re-review BZ URL? N/A * Any extra information? It was just retired in [RH#1741099](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741099) as ipsilon now is py3 compatible and works in f31+ in git master `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8713

1 week, 4 days

2
10
0 / 0

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng August 2019