On 11/29/2010 10:43 PM, JohnS wrote:
> I don't think it is really clear enough if people are wanted to submit
> patches to the bz for things like [1].
absolutely do so. If there is anything in the distro that hits
properties outside .centos.org - then you should at-least file it in,
patch would be great as well; but do not hold the report back if you
don't have a patch.
> Or for that matter for those of
> who can fix things and provide el6 workable sources. IE, the ones of us
> that have EL5 hosts that support building for EL6. It seems to me it
> was just a errrrr ok if you can but we don't really want that? I think
> we all need an enlightenment on this.
Not sure what you mean by that, did you find sources that did'nt work in
EL6 ? That is the sort of thing which would need to ideally make its way
into bugzilla.r.c
> I have a Spread Sheet dump of bz.co.c and 90% are Block Status? I also
> see [2] which has not changed in 3 days {Sat 27 Nov 2010 05:50:45 PM
> EST}. Check the server logs and you will see :-)
> {Mon Nov 29 17:42:30 EST 2010}
That timestamp is never going to change, its coming from moin's internal
version check; whereas the page changes content. I'll plumb in a
'generated at: ' timestamp as well. I'll also add in a list of pkgs not
considered as yet, and the whitelists already in place.
The actual report status should be clear enough as to what the status of
the corresponding package is.
- KB