Hi Rex.
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009
included?
Eli
Hi,
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009 included?
Have a look at: http://floriansievert.de/linux/repo/f10/unstable/i386/ The newest version seems to run fine with KDE 4.2 from kde-testing. I just noticed that the specs hadn't been updated from me, but I will do it afternoon. Maybe this helps ...
Best regards, Florian
On Saturday 31 January 2009 10:30:47 Florian Sievert wrote:
Hi,
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009 included?
Have a look at: http://floriansievert.de/linux/repo/f10/unstable/i386/ The newest version seems to run fine with KDE 4.2 from kde-testing. I just noticed that the specs hadn't been updated from me, but I will do it afternoon. Maybe this helps ...
Thanks for the info.
I've installed the plasmoid manually and I confirm that it does indeed work. The repo mentioned will very useful for i386 users. My desktop computer is x86_64 (oh well).
Eli
Hi,
I've installed the plasmoid manually and I confirm that it does indeed work. The repo mentioned will very useful for i386 users. My desktop computer is x86_64 (oh well).
In fact, I am also build 64bit-Builds, however lots of issues went broken during the last time and my time is currently very limited. The i386-build that starts to work are quite new also and I am working on getting 64bit back again. Maybe even this weekend. However, my real intention was not to move you to my testing repository ;) This package is quite simple and I might mind to maintain it officially. Want to get into it a while again, but during my thesis I cannot garuantee that I am able to work on it frequently. However ihatethecashew was updated twice a half year ... ;)
Best regards, Florian
On Saturday 31 January 2009 11:17:59 Florian Sievert wrote:
Hi,
I've installed the plasmoid manually and I confirm that it does indeed work. The repo mentioned will very useful for i386 users. My desktop computer is x86_64 (oh well).
In fact, I am also build 64bit-Builds, however lots of issues went broken during the last time and my time is currently very limited. The i386-build that starts to work are quite new also and I am working on getting 64bit back again. Maybe even this weekend. However, my real intention was not to move you to my testing repository ;) This package is quite simple and I might mind to maintain it officially. Want to get into it a while again, but during my thesis I cannot garuantee that I am able to work on it frequently. However ihatethecashew was updated twice a half year ... ;)
Good luck on your thesis. Really. Take care of that first. If you consider it like taking a break then certainly let us know when the 64 bit repo is backup. I for one, would be very happy to see select kde-look stuff built for Fedora.
Eli
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009 included?
Package it (or adopt Florian's existing package) and submit it for review...
Kevin Kofler
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009 included?
Package it (or adopt Florian's existing package) and submit it for review...
Kevin Kofler
Eli,
I was going to say similar myself, us freeloaders are going to have to lend a hand with so many possible plasmoids. If I find one that I like, I'll try my hand at packaging it.
On Saturday 31 January 2009 20:22:02 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at
wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009 included?
Package it (or adopt Florian's existing package) and submit it for review...
Kevin Kofler
Eli,
I was going to say similar myself, us freeloaders are going to have to lend a hand with so many possible plasmoids. If I find one that I like, I'll try my hand at packaging it.
I was thinking the same thing myself. But, I only have resources to be able to test things on Fedora version I currently have installed on my computer. And even if I did have the resources to test on 5 different platforms plus 3 others in developemnt, I'm not really sure that I would have the time to reliably do the qa needed to ensure everything is working as development progresses. If Florian finds the time to get x86_64 packages available and lets everyone know that its up and running I will certainly be getting it from there.
Eli
2009/1/31 Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org
I was thinking the same thing myself. But, I only have resources to be able to test things on Fedora version I currently have installed on my computer. And
This is not such an issue as mock can build packages for multiple versions of Fedora on the same machine. Thats what i do quite successfully. As for other architectures koji can build on all the available versions and architectures that Fedora supports.
even if I did have the resources to test on 5 different platforms plus 3 others in developemnt,
Most of the rest of us dont have machines for all the versions and platforms available. We test what we can and the rest we have to rely on feedback.
I'm not really sure that I would have the time to reliably do the qa needed to ensure everything is working as development progresses.
Time is indeed the biggest issue. The good news is most of the simpler packages are quite easy to package once and then just occasionally do fixes, updates or rebuilds to cope with incompatibilities/upstream updates. Good thing with plasma applets are they are for the most part not required by other parts of the system so failure in an applet should only affect the applet itself.
[...]
On Saturday 31 January 2009 22:17:15 John5342 wrote:
2009/1/31 Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org
I was thinking the same thing myself. But, I only have resources to be able to test things on Fedora version I currently have installed on my computer. And
This is not such an issue as mock can build packages for multiple versions of Fedora on the same machine. Thats what i do quite successfully. As for other architectures koji can build on all the available versions and architectures that Fedora supports.
even if I did have the resources to test on 5 different platforms plus 3 others in developemnt,
Most of the rest of us dont have machines for all the versions and platforms available. We test what we can and the rest we have to rely on feedback.
I'm not really sure that I would have the time to reliably do the qa needed to ensure everything is working as development progresses.
Time is indeed the biggest issue. The good news is most of the simpler packages are quite easy to package once and then just occasionally do fixes, updates or rebuilds to cope with incompatibilities/upstream updates. Good thing with plasma applets are they are for the most part not required by other parts of the system so failure in an applet should only affect the applet itself.
OK... If somebody would point me to the documentation regarding what's involved, I will certainly look it over and consider it.
Eli
2009/2/1 Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org
OK... If somebody would point me to the documentation regarding what's involved, I will certainly look it over and consider it.
Virtually all the documentation for becoming a package maintainer is located at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers
The most relevant section to you is probably:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
which also includes links to further help on each step.
The kde-plasma-* packages at http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/should give you a good idea of how to create a plasma applet package.
I haven't specifically spoken to anyone but I am confident someone in the KDE group can look after the sponsorship aspect.
Dont get put off by the sheer size of the instructions. Once you done it once you soon get the hang of it. There is also lots of help available on mailing lists and irc if you need it.
On Sunday 01 February 2009 19:58:56 John5342 wrote:
2009/2/1 Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org
OK... If somebody would point me to the documentation regarding what's involved, I will certainly look it over and consider it.
Virtually all the documentation for becoming a package maintainer is located at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers
The most relevant section to you is probably:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
which also includes links to further help on each step.
The kde-plasma-* packages at http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/should give you a good idea of how to create a plasma applet package.
I haven't specifically spoken to anyone but I am confident someone in the KDE group can look after the sponsorship aspect.
Dont get put off by the sheer size of the instructions. Once you done it once you soon get the hang of it. There is also lots of help available on mailing lists and irc if you need it.
Thanks for the info.
Eli
On Saturday 31 of January 2009 06:55:10 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Hi Rex.
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009
included?
Eli
Hi Eli, now when we have 4.2 I think we can import more plasma applets to official Fedora repositories - Plasma ABI should be stable now. I'd like to do it, best way I think is to use Florian's SPECs, check/review them and merge to Fedora repositories. As he replied here - he's busy now and I totally understand that - there are more important things than Plasma - "I hate the Cashew" confirms it ;-)
Florian, Kevin - any objections regarding this?
Jaroslav
PS: I like Cashew!
On Monday 02 February 2009 11:03:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Saturday 31 of January 2009 06:55:10 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Hi Rex.
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91009
included?
Eli
Hi Eli, now when we have 4.2 I think we can import more plasma applets to official Fedora repositories - Plasma ABI should be stable now. I'd like to do it, best way I think is to use Florian's SPECs, check/review them and merge to Fedora repositories. As he replied here - he's busy now and I totally understand that - there are more important things than Plasma - "I hate the Cashew" confirms it ;-)
Florian, Kevin - any objections regarding this?
Jaroslav
PS: I like Cashew!
:)
I've started working on this. It'll take me a little while to get familiar with everything. I already know that my SPEC file works on Fedora 10 i386 and x86_64. But, I want to look up a couple of things.
Eli
On Monday 02 February 2009 20:37:34 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Monday 02 February 2009 11:03:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Saturday 31 of January 2009 06:55:10 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Hi Rex.
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=9100 9
included?
Eli
Hi Eli, now when we have 4.2 I think we can import more plasma applets to official Fedora repositories - Plasma ABI should be stable now. I'd like to do it, best way I think is to use Florian's SPECs, check/review them and merge to Fedora repositories. As he replied here - he's busy now and I totally understand that - there are more important things than Plasma - "I hate the Cashew" confirms it ;-)
Florian, Kevin - any objections regarding this?
Jaroslav
PS: I like Cashew!
:)
I've started working on this. It'll take me a little while to get familiar with everything. I already know that my SPEC file works on Fedora 10 i386 and x86_64. But, I want to look up a couple of things.
Don't hesitate to ask me if you need some help!
Jaroslav
Eli
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 13:28:58 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Monday 02 February 2009 20:37:34 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Monday 02 February 2009 11:03:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Saturday 31 of January 2009 06:55:10 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Hi Rex.
Any chance to get the "I Hate the Cashew" plasmoid at
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/I+HATE+the+Cashew?content=91 00 9
included?
Eli
Hi Eli, now when we have 4.2 I think we can import more plasma applets to official Fedora repositories - Plasma ABI should be stable now. I'd like to do it, best way I think is to use Florian's SPECs, check/review them and merge to Fedora repositories. As he replied here - he's busy now and I totally understand that - there are more important things than Plasma - "I hate the Cashew" confirms it ;-)
Florian, Kevin - any objections regarding this?
Jaroslav
PS: I like Cashew!
:)
I've started working on this. It'll take me a little while to get familiar with everything. I already know that my SPEC file works on Fedora 10 i386 and x86_64. But, I want to look up a couple of things.
Don't hesitate to ask me if you need some help!
Jaroslav
Thanks Jaroslav
But I've just submitted
kde-plasma-ihatethecashew
and
kde-plasma-tranlatoid
for review.
They both seem to work OK.
If they should pass, I will request a sponsor.
Eli
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 14:35:33 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
But I've just submitted kde-plasma-ihatethecashew and kde-plasma-tranlatoid for review.
bugzilla #'s?
Oops. :)
kde-plasma-ihatethecashew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728
kde-plasma-translatoid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
Eli
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:45:05PM +0200, Eli Wapniarski wrote:
kde-plasma-ihatethecashew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 kde-plasma-translatoid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
You need to make those bugs block "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
That way it is clear that you need to be sponsored.
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 14:58:08 Sven Lankes wrote:
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:45:05PM +0200, Eli Wapniarski wrote:
kde-plasma-ihatethecashew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 kde-plasma-translatoid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
You need to make those bugs block "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
That way it is clear that you need to be sponsored.
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Eli
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
-- Rex
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 15:32:03 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Ok, I'm reviewing it right now, it's better to do it asap because later we can forgot about this packages. Still waiting for Lukas'es kio_sysinfo review ;-) I'll ping you when we sort out issues and we have package in good shape. The first one - I hate Cashew is really easy to review but the second one brings again flags issue :(
Jaroslav
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
-- Rex _______________________________________________ fedora-kde mailing list fedora-kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kde
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 16:49:48 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 15:32:03 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Ok, I'm reviewing it right now, it's better to do it asap because later we can forgot about this packages. Still waiting for Lukas'es kio_sysinfo review ;-) I'll ping you when we sort out issues and we have package in good shape. The first one - I hate Cashew is really easy to review but the second one brings again flags issue :(
Jaroslav
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
I've got a Fedora account. The instructions on how to ask to be sponsored are not at all clear. It provides no navigation at all other than where there are a list of sponsores.
Jaroslav.
I type rpmlint -i ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/kde-plasma ihatethecashew-0.2b-3.fc10.src.rpm and get
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
I type rpmlint -c ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kde-plasma-ihatethecashew.spec and get... huh?
usage: rpmlint.py [<options>] <rpm files|specfile> options in: [-i|--info] [-I <error,error,>] [-c|--check <check>] [-a|--all] [-C|--checkdir <checkdir>] [-h|--help] [-v|--verbose] [-E|--extractdir <dir>] [-p|--profile] [-V|--version] [-n|--noexception] [-f|--file <config file to use instead of ~/.rpmlintrc>]
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 19:22:38 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 16:49:48 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 15:32:03 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Ok, I'm reviewing it right now, it's better to do it asap because later we can forgot about this packages. Still waiting for Lukas'es kio_sysinfo review ;-) I'll ping you when we sort out issues and we have package in good shape. The first one - I hate Cashew is really easy to review but the second one brings again flags issue :(
Jaroslav
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
I've got a Fedora account. The instructions on how to ask to be sponsored are not at all clear. It provides no navigation at all other than where there are a list of sponsores.
Just wondering if I got this right... I added "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" to the blocks field. Is that right?
Eli
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 20:37:25 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 19:22:38 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 16:49:48 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 15:32:03 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Ok, I'm reviewing it right now, it's better to do it asap because later we can forgot about this packages. Still waiting for Lukas'es kio_sysinfo review ;-) I'll ping you when we sort out issues and we have package in good shape. The first one - I hate Cashew is really easy to review but the second one brings again flags issue :(
Jaroslav
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
I've got a Fedora account. The instructions on how to ask to be sponsored are not at all clear. It provides no navigation at all other than where there are a list of sponsores.
Just wondering if I got this right... I added "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" to the blocks field. Is that right?
Don't hurry :-) Review is on beginning! There are several other rules to be checked and then we have to wait for Rex or Kevin, I can't sponsor you. In this case you don't need to set FE-NEEDSPONSOR because we can sponsor you.
Ok, I'm going to finish review, you're lucky - some packages can wait years for it :D
Jaroslav
Eli
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 10:40:20 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 20:37:25 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 19:22:38 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 16:49:48 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 15:32:03 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Though, the usual procedure is that your first reviewer is usually your sponsor. Doing these in parallel is ok too.
I'd be happy for Jaroslav (or other) do a first review here, and once most review issues are sorted out, I (or another sponsor) give things a final review before approving the pkg(s) and sponsoring you.
Ok, I'm reviewing it right now, it's better to do it asap because later we can forgot about this packages. Still waiting for Lukas'es kio_sysinfo review ;-) I'll ping you when we sort out issues and we have package in good shape. The first one - I hate Cashew is really easy to review but the second one brings again flags issue :(
Jaroslav
Have you created a FAS account yet? If not, please do so... we could even forgo the wait on reviews.
I've got a Fedora account. The instructions on how to ask to be sponsored are not at all clear. It provides no navigation at all other than where there are a list of sponsores.
Just wondering if I got this right... I added "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" to the blocks field. Is that right?
Don't hurry :-) Review is on beginning! There are several other rules to be checked and then we have to wait for Rex or Kevin, I can't sponsor you. In this case you don't need to set FE-NEEDSPONSOR because we can sponsor you.
Ok, I'm going to finish review, you're lucky - some packages can wait years for it :D
Thanks Jaroslav
Eli
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 09:47:33 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Ok, I'm going to finish review, you're lucky - some packages can wait years for it :D
Thanks Jaroslav
I think I hate Cashew is now ready, waiting for final check by Rex - then he will sponsor you and you can ask for CVS and once CVS is ready you can import it and finally build in Koji. Long trip ;-)
Jaroslav
Eli
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 11:18:16 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 09:47:33 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
Ok, I'm going to finish review, you're lucky - some packages can wait years for it :D
Thanks Jaroslav
I think I hate Cashew is now ready, waiting for final check by Rex - then he will sponsor you and you can ask for CVS and once CVS is ready you can import it and finally build in Koji. Long trip ;-)
Jaroslav
Thanks for that
Eli
2009/2/3 Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org
I've got a Fedora account. The instructions on how to ask to be sponsored are not at all clear. It provides no navigation at all other than where there are a list of sponsores.
In this particular case you dont need to ask to be sponsored. If you have stated in your review that you need a sponsor and have blocked FE-NEEDSPONSOR then potential sponsors can find you easily. In this case Rex has already effectively said he will sponsor you unless somebody else gets there first although if others want to do an initial review first they should feel free to.
Jaroslav.
I type rpmlint -i ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/kde-plasma ihatethecashew-0.2b-3.fc10.src.rpm and get
No need to specify any aditional arguments eg:
rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/kde-plasmaihatethecashew-0.2b-3.fc10.src.rpm
If you leave out the arguments then all checks are performed by default. rpmlint should be run on the spec file, the source rpm and the built rpms.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
I type rpmlint -c ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kde-plasma-ihatethecashew.spec and get... huh?
[...]
Same as above. Leave out the additional arguments. Should be:
rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kde-plasma-ihatethecashew.spec
The only time specifying specific tests to be run is is there is a vast number of warnings/errors or a huge package that would take forever to do all checks on.
Just wondering if I got this right... I added "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" to the blocks
field. Is that right?
Correct.
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 04:22:06PM +0200, Eli Wapniarski wrote:
You need to make those bugs block "FE-NEEDSPONSOR" according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored That way it is clear that you need to be sponsored.
The guidelines seem to indicate first things need to get passed and after they pass I can ask for sponsorship.
Wrong.
You submit one or more review requests blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR. After that either you find a potential sponsor or a sponsor finds you, reviews one of your packages, looks at other stuff you've done and then approves your sponsorship request in fas. It is also possible that your sponsor asks your to do some (demo)-package-reviews yourself to show that you've understood the principles of fedora packaging.
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 13:45:05 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 14:35:33 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
But I've just submitted kde-plasma-ihatethecashew and kde-plasma-tranlatoid for review.
bugzilla #'s?
Oops. :)
kde-plasma-ihatethecashew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728
kde-plasma-translatoid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
Ops and we have flags again on topic - this package ships kbflags...
Jaroslav
Eli
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 13:35:33 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
But I've just submitted kde-plasma-ihatethecashew and kde-plasma-tranlatoid for review.
bugzilla #'s?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
I can help with review but I can't sponsor him, it's work for you Rex :)
-- Rex _______________________________________________ fedora-kde mailing list fedora-kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kde
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 12:35:33 Rex Dieter wrote:
Eli Wapniarski wrote:
But I've just submitted kde-plasma-ihatethecashew and kde-plasma-tranlatoid for review.
bugzilla #'s?
Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730
Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728
-- Rex