[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Fedora Weekly News Issue 85



= Fedora Weekly News Issue 85 =

Welcome to Fedora Weekly News Issue 85[1] for the week of April 22nd
through April 28th, 2007. The latest issue can always be found here[2]
and RSS Feed can be found here[3].

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue85

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/LatestIssue

[3] http://feeds.feedburner.com/fwn

  1. Fedora Weekly News Issue 85
        1. Announcements
              1. Announcing Fedora 7 Test 4 (6.93)
              2. Making the Merge Happen
        2. Planet Fedora
              1. Red Hat Magazine OLPC Articles
              2. Red Hat Summit Compilation
              3. 0-Day Fedora Kernels
              4. Fedora Article in LWN
        3. Marketing
              1. Red Hat's JBoss to Adopt Fedora Model
        4. Developments Mon, April 23 - Sat, April 28 2007
              1. Root Filesystem Encryption Patch
              2. RPM Packaging Feedback Sought and Received
              3. Wow, Presto Rocks!
              4. Pidgin Epoch Removed, Rawhide Updates Need Manual Correction
              5. How To Get Your Packages Sponsored And Reviewed
              6. Fedora7-Test4 Announced
              7. Repowars II: Add Some EPEL "repotag" Duct Tape?
              8. Standard Naming Scheme For KDE Components
              9. kdebase And lftp Cause Rawhide Update Problem
             10. The Merge Is Upon Us!
        5. Maintainers
              1. libperl & perl in Fedora 7
              2. Guidelines Update
              3. Fedora 7 Development Freeze
              4. The Name For Fedora 7?
        6. Documentation
              1. Release Notes Freeze
              2. Media Handling in Pirut
              3. Knowledge Base?
        7. Translation
              1. Release Note POT/PO Files
        8. Infrastructure
              1. Operating Procedures
              2. Sponsored vs Volunteers
        9. Artwork
              1. The Open Pallete
              2. Echo SVG Fixed
              3. Linuxtag Germany
       10. Security Week
              1. Firefox 1.5 Support Extended
       11. Security Advisories
              1. Fedora Core 6 Security Advisories
              2. Fedora Core 5 Security Advisories
       12. Events and Meetings
              1. Release Engineering Meeting: 2007-04-23
              2. Packaging Committee Meeting: 2007-04-24
              3. Ambassadors Meeting: 2007-04-26
              4. French Ambassadors Meeting: 2007-04-29
              5. Event Report: CarolinaCon 2007 - North Carolina, USA
              6. Event Report: FLISOL 2007 - Santiago, Chile
              7. Event Report: FLISOL 2007 - Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
       13. Errata
              1. Erratum #1
              2. Erratum #2
       14. Feedback

== Announcements ==

In this section, we cover announcements from various projects.

=== Announcing Fedora 7 Test 4 (6.93) ===

The Fedora Project is pleased to announce[1] the release of the fourth
and final test release of Fedora 7!

Test 4 is for beta users. This is the time when we MUST have full
community participation. Without this participation both hardware and
software functionality suffers. We need your help. Join us! This is
the final test release before the Fedora 7 release, which is scheduled
for May 24, 2007.

For further information see [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/7].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2007-April/msg00006.html

=== Making the Merge Happen ===

JesseKeating announces in fedora-devel-list[1],

"Test4 is out, Final looms, must have merge!

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/CoreExtrasMerge is the working
page for the merge status.  I would like to get merged asap and shake out the
problems and get some builds done before the final freeze.

Please provide input!"

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01250.html

== Planet Fedora ==

In this secton, we cover a highlight of Planet Fedora - an aggregation
of blogs from world wide Fedora contributors.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Planet

=== Red Hat Magazine OLPC Articles ===

JohnPalmieri points out in hig blog[1],

"For the general audience who wish to find out more about the OLPC
project and the people working on it (or at least the ones in
Cambridge, MA), part 2 of the OLPC video blog[2] is now online.

For developers, part 2 of my Porting a PyGTK game to Sugar[3] series
is also up. The first lesson focused on the game itself. This lesson
shows the initial port."

[1] http://www.j5live.com/?p=361

[2] http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2007/04/25/inside-one-laptop-per-child-episode-02/

[3] http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2007/04/26/building-the-xo-porting-a-pygtk-game-to-sugar-part-two/

=== Red Hat Summit Compilation ===

JefSpaleta points out in his blog[1],

"So I finally got around to poking at my digital music library and
playing with rhythmbox again after almost a year after my move. I
noticed the magnatune plugin and started poking at the available
content in the catalog. Some of its not bad, but some of it's not to
good. So instead of wasting my time hunting and pecking I decided to
do a quick search for compilations. And I found this: The Red Hat
Summit[2] Compilation[3]."

[1] http://jspaleta.livejournal.com/9346.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/

[3] http://magnatune.com/artists/albums/magnacomp-redhat/


=== 0-Day Fedora Kernels ===

DaveJones points out in his blog[1],

"A few days ago I fixed up the script that grabbed the latest kernel I
built for Fedora and dumped it onto my people.redhat.com page. F7
users can now install the repo file[2] into /etc/yum.repos.d/ and have
it grab those fresh kernels as soon as they're built without having to
wait a whole day to get them from rawhide."

[1] http://kernelslacker.livejournal.com/77038.html

[2] http://people.redhat.com/davej/kernels/Fedora/fc7/kernel.repo

=== Fedora Article in LWN ===

RahulSundaram points out in his blog[1],

"LWN published a article titled Blaming Fedora[2] but really praising
it for a strong policy on Free software. The discussions in the
comments lead to me having a ongoing offlist very constructive
conversations with Brett Smith, licensing compliance engineer from FSF
on Fedora Free software analysis[3]. We are having good progress. I
will post updates when we reach major milestones."

[1] http://rahulsundaram.livejournal.com/11380.html

[2] http://lwn.net/Articles/230042/

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FreeSoftwareAnalysis

== Marketing ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Marketing Project.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing

=== Red Hat's JBoss to Adopt Fedora Model ===

RahulSundaram points out in fedora-marketing-list[1],

"The move would mean that JBoss[2] would deliver a Fedora-like community
edition of its core software that only looks forward. As with the Fedora
Linux project, no backward compatibility is guaranteed—Fedora is focused
on the future and new features."

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-marketing-list/2007-April/msg00160.html

[2] http://labs.jboss.com/

== Developments   Mon, April 23 - Sat, April 28 2007 ==

In this section, we cover the problems/solutions,
people/personalities, and ups/downs of the endless discussions on
Fedora Developments.

http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

=== Root Filesystem Encryption Patch ===

ThomasSwan posted[1] details of how to achieve an encrypted root
filesystem on FC6 using LUKS[2]. Thomas was hoping to get his modified
mkinitrd script into F7-Test4, but it was pointed out that firstly,
F7t4 had already shipped[3] and secondly, that new features like this
were not appropriate anyway during a final freeze[4].  All responding
to Thomas made it clear that his contribution was not being rejected
and that they hoped to see it in F8.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01217.html

[2] http://www.cygnetech.com/linux/howtos/root_filesystem_encryption.php

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01221.html

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01225.html

Thomas was happy enough with this and sought further feedback[5] on
how to avoid problems with keeping the modified mkinitrd in sync with
kernel updates.

[5] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01226.html

BrunoWolf III was less happy as he'd been hoping that these patches
(which had been around for a while) would make it into F7 which would
coincide with his need to upgrade some FC5 machines.  He wondered[6]
who had to be bugged to make the patches actually get incorporated?
Thomas answered that he would be happy to assist Bruno patch F7 and
intended to set up a yum repository to aid others.  FlorianLaRoche
pointed Bruno to the wiki, where information about this could be
shared but this didn't satisfy Bruno.  Finally, BillNottingham was
drawn into the discussion and noted some problems[7] with the patches
which was why he had not yet rolled them in.

[6] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01227.html

[7] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01276.html

=== RPM Packaging Feedback Sought and Received ===

Kelly (lightsolphoenix) looked for advice on some KDE packages that
Kelly had produced[1].  TrondDanielsen suggested[2] that, as Kelly was
interested in being a maintainer of these packages for Fedora, it
would be a good idea to go through the official procedure[3].
RudolfKastl suggested that the SRPM packages would be useful, and
Kelly responded with those packages and the spec files.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01202.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01208.html

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join

=== Wow, Presto Rocks! ===

Continuing the positive reactions to presto, RexDieter was excited[1]
by his experiences with it.  Rex wondered how the tools to create
presto-enabled repositories were coming along and intoned the mantra
"release early, release often."  RichardHughes was also interested in
these tools[2].  JonathanDieter pleaded end-of-term pressure and
pointed to the tools in an unfinished state[3].  MartinSourada noted
that he too saw huge savings in bandwidth (90%) for an update on
FC6[4] and encouraged the inclusion of presto for F8.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01188.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01193.html

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01194.html

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01196.html

=== Pidgin Epoch Removed, Rawhide Updates Need Manual Correction ===

As a result of negotiations between AOL and the developers of Gaim[1],
the program has been renamed to "Pidgin".  WarrenTogami noted that the
opportunity to remove the epoch had been missed with the original
Fedora Extras 7 package[2], and that this was now corrected and
rawhide users should manually fix the problem using:

su -c "yum remove libpurple"
su -c "yum install pidgin"

The issue arose later in a rawhide user error report[3], manifesting
as a missing "libpurple.so".  "libpurple" is the renamed "libgaim".
Another user reported that he did not have this problem with rawhide,
but JoshBoyer was able to explain[4] that this was because he was not
using the latest epochless package (which yum would refuse to update).
TrondDanielsen also quickly provided a practical fix[5].

[1] http://www.pidgin.im/index.php?id=177

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01195.html

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01238.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01242.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01240.html

=== How To Get Your Packages Sponsored And Reviewed ===

A query from AntonKuznetsov opened up a discussion about the proper
way to submit software for review[1].  NigelJones posted links[2] to
the specific package that Anton was talking about ("Profugus", a
time-dependent automatic migrator of Xen kernels) and counselled
patience, noting that the review process was at least two weeks
usually and that Anton had only submitted the package ten days ago.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01268.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01270.html

Nigel's informative email clarified an apparent confusion in the
original post about the role of volunteer "pre-reviewers", who note
problems with packages before they are formally reviewed by someone
that can act as a sponsor.  ManuelWolfshant who had pre-reviewed the
package confirmed that this was the case[3].

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01272.html

PatriceDumas also suggested patience, and a part of his post that said
there are some reviews that are years old surprised RahulSundaram[4],
who felt that packages which had been in review for more than a few
months should have their reviews closed as they were clogging up the
process.  Patrice argued that there was already a "stalled review"
policy for dealing with this, and along with NigelJones pointed out
several reasons for keeping such a review open.  These included
maintaining a continuous body of information, ease of contact with
external upstream developers.  JasonTibbits argued specifically
against Rahul's assertion that software older than six months was
probably obsoleted[5].  Jason also suggested that people should ping
the reviewers more often, then closed with a promise to start
reviewing again Real Soon Now (TM).

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01284.html

[5] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01307.html

RalfCorsepius provided an affirmative datapoint to Rahul's original
question.  JasonTibbitts felt that these were very atypical
packages[6] and RexDieter thought that on occasion third-party
repositories could be a positive way of getting more feedback, but
Ralf didn't see that as true for his particular case[7] which failure
he attributed to deficiencies in the rpmbuild system, the guidelines
and the competence of "review monkeys"[8]. KevinKofler then proferred
some mutual aid to Ralf[8a] as Kevin now owns a package and can thus
perform review for those who don't need sponsors.

[6] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01308.html

[7] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01320.html

[8] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01286.html

[8a] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01338.html

JoséMatos pointed out that the merge of the Core and Extras
repositories might have filled up the queue[9] and that in general
things were working as they should be, and Anton posted thanks for all
the feedback and information that he'd obtained[10].

[9] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01283.html

[10] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01312.html

=== Fedora7-Test4 Announced ===

The final test of F7 was announced[1] by WillWoods on April 26th.  The
torrents were temporarily delayed[2], but are now available.  There
were several additions to the copious release notes:

1) AdamJackson pointed out[3] that users of integrated Intel graphics
chipsets would be using a new modesetting driver by default.

2) DavidWoodhouse made the hearts of PS3 owners beat a little
faster[4] by pointing out that F7 was the first Fedora to work out of
the box on their box.

3) KevinKofler caught a small error[5] that implied that KDE was not in the spin

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01252.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01265.html

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01258.html

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01263.html

[5] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01271.html

RahulSundaram was not impressed with the move to rename the
distribution as simply "Fedora".  Following up on his questioning
about whether this had been discussed by marketing, JoshBoyer said it
had not been discussed on a public list, but on IRC[5a], and AxelThimm
provided[6] an example of how this could lead to confusion centered
around what was on the spin (on the DVD or multiple CDs) and what was
available on the network in addition to this.  There were a couple of
suggestions, but no agreement (other than that naming sucks and that
there was much confusion)[7][8].

[5a] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01292.html

[6] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01325.html

[7] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01334.html

[8] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01342.html

=== Repowars II:  Add Some EPEL "repotag" Duct Tape?  ===

ThorstenLeemhuis moved a discussion from @fedora-maintainers in order
to reach a wider audience[1].  This discussion concerned the Extra
Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) repository[2] that aims to
provide a way for high-quality Fedora packages to be provided for RHEL
and related spinoffs such as CentOS and Scientific Linux. Repository
tags (repotags) are an optional addition to the name of a package,
which mainly served the purpose in pre-Extras days of providing
brand-recognition between the many excellent, competing repositories.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01232.html

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/

Thorsten led off with some personal observations, but wished to
concentrate on what seemed to him the most important thing: a
political problem whereby some would feel that EPEL had been
privileged over other "outside the fence" repositories which had to
use a repotag, while EPEL did not.  Bearing all this in mind, Thorsten
was specifically soliciting discussion prior to any of the concerned
steering bodies voting[4] on his concrete proposals to solve the
problem.  FernandoLopez-Lezcano was largely in agreement[5] with
Thorsten's scheme to use defines in the EPEL buildsystem to add a
repotag, while simultaneously leaving the Fedora buildsystem
undisturbed.

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01305.html

[5] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01297.html

AxelThimm was also mainlu in agreement with the proposal[6], and
JefSpaleta provided one of his usual informative and thoughtful takes
on the situation[7], which characterized it as a general usability
problem, limited by the design of the current tools.  Jef also roughly
outlined how package signatures /might/ be used to get around this in
the future, a proposal which drew some favourable comment from
Fernando.

[6] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01326.html

[7] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01266.html

=== Standard Naming Scheme For KDE Components ===

In further naming scheme news, Kelly (lightsolphoenix) wondered
whether the names of various KDE components should be patterned after
the GTK ones[1].  TomTromey wondered the same thing about emacs
dependent pieces and JonathanUnderwood explained that it depended on
whether they were solely for emacs, Xemacs, or could be used on
both[2].

RexDieter pointed Kelly to a draft packaging guideline for KDE[3], and
recommended following upstream in the meantime.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01311.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01335.html

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01314.html

=== kdebase And lftp Cause Rawhide Update Problem ===

An attempt to update kdebase and lftp on rawhide left DavidHunter
seeking help[1] when everything he'd tried failed.  Mark and JoshBoyer
both suggested a nodeps erasure of the current versions of the
packages[2] as an immediate practical workarounds.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01235.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01237.html

JesseKeating acknowledged the workarounds, but wanted to get to the
bottom of the problem and asked for bugzilla reports, prompting
MichaelSchwendt to explain that these were the result of temporary
breakage in rawhide[3] due to known causes.

[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01245.html

MamoruTasaka gave a reply specifically on the lftp problem[3a] and
RexDieter stepped in to help with the kdebase problem[3b], which
seemed to be to do with the OP mixing in packages from the kde-redhat
repository with Fedora's own kde package.

Jesse was still unhappy with this because it would not preserve an
upgrade path within rawhide (which is a desideratum according to
recent FESCo meetings).  To this end he proposed an
Obsoletes/Provides, which neither PatriceDumas nor MichaelSchwendt
were enthusiastic about[4].  Michael's argument seemed to suggest that
there are several ways in which an upgrade path within rawhide are not
always be practical.

[3a] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01246.html

[3b] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01249.html

[4] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01259.html

=== The Merge Is Upon Us! ===

Drawing our attention to the imminence of merging, JesseKeating asked
for input[1] on the plans to merge.  After a query from HansdeGoede
about gstreamer plugins, MatthiasClasen posted a tracker bugzilla
entry[2] for items that would have to happen post-merge and freeze.

[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01250.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01264.html

== Maintainers ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Maintainers, the group of people who
maintain the software packages in Fedora

https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers

=== libperl & perl in Fedora 7 ===

Due to build issues, libperl.so was originally going to be moved[1]
from the perl package into its own sub-package; however, all has been
corrected in the Perl camp for rawhide users. Perl was multilib in
Fedora Core 6 due to Gaim, but Jesse Keating has "whitelisted" perl to
make it multilib again with Pidgin (Gaim) being in Extras.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-April/msg00439.html

=== Guidelines Update ===

Clearing up the relationship between the packager and reviewer is an
update to the Packaging Guidelines[1]. It is the responsibility of the
reviewer to point out problems and it is the responsibility of the
packager to correct the problem, while it is a combined responsibility
to determine the severity. If the packager or reviewer feels a
particular package should be exempt from the Packaging Guidelines[2],
it must be brought to the attention of the Fedora Packaging Committee.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-April/msg00484.html

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines

=== Fedora 7 Development Freeze ===

With Fedora 7 Test 4 now out the door, there is now a continual
development freeze[1] until the May 24 release. During this time, only
bug fixes will be accepted. Core packages must also be using the
f7-final tag.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-April/msg00582.html

=== The Name For Fedora 7? ===

With Fedora 7 quickly approaching, Jesse Keating[1] is also seeking
Fedora maintainers to fill in the blank: Bordeaux -> Zod -> <blank>?
Zod is a <blank>, <blank> is a <blank>. Suggestions are to be run
through the legal queue and then voting takes place afterwards.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-April/msg00587.html

== Documentation ==

In this section, we cover the Fedora Documentation Project.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject

=== Release Notes Freeze ===

The release notes wiki[1] is was temporarily frozen with the
information being ported over to CVS for translators to begin their
work, reports PaulFrields.[2]  The wiki was unfrozen so notes can
continue to be added up to Fedora 7 release; these additional notes
are combined with the ISO-based release notes to be published as a
Web-only release[3].

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00154.html

[3] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes

=== Media Handling in Pirut ===

RahulSundaram announced that he is working on updating the Software
Management Guide[1] with the goal of releasing a new version for
Fedora 7[2]. If you are interested in helping, you can find more
details under the guide's working notes.[3]

[1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00174.html

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/SoftwareManagementGuide/WorkingNotes

There was also a request for help with documenting the support for
media in the development version of Pirut. Although this feature is
present, the required auto-configuration is not yet present in
Anaconda and so the documentation is needed before release. If anybody
is interested in helping with this send a post to the DocsProject
mailing list.[4]

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00173.html

=== Knowledge Base? ===

Following the report of a bug with a simple fix, the idea of a
knowledge base was briefly discussed. It is hoped that a knowledge
base would provide the ideal location for one-off bugs such as this,
which in turn might have the effect of making it easier for users to
contribute docs.[1]

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-April/msg00187.html

== Translation ==

This section, we cover the news surrounding the Fedora Translation
(L10n) Project.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/L10N

=== Release Note POT/PO Files ===

Release notes POT and PO files for Fedora 7 have been made available
for translation, announced PaulFrields [1].  He also mentioned in his
followup[2] the best ways to obtain the files.

Localization of Fedora 7 release notes by translators was ongoing
during the week, with the PO files due back to Fedora Documentation on
2 May[3].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2007-April/msg00092.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-trans-list/2007-April/msg00093.html

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Schedule#relnotes-schedule

== Infrastructure ==

In this section, we cover the Fedora Infrastructure Project.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure

=== Operating Procedures ===

As part of organizing Infrastructure, MikeMcGrath has been working on
some standard operating procedures (SOPs)[1] and has posted his work
thus far[2].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-April/msg00162.html

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/SOP/database?action=fullsearch&context=180&value=Infrastructure%2FSOP&titlesearch=Titles

=== Sponsored vs Volunteers ===

A discussion started this week about tracking sponsored versus
volunteer contributions to Fedora, with sponsored meaning the
contribution was done as part of a for-pay work assignment by the
contributor.  This thread was started by RahulSundaram, who was
interested in having these oft-requested statistics.  The thread
expanded to discuss the ideal of tracking all contributions made to
Fedora, but it appears package maintainers are the first to be
tracked[2].  It was emphasized that the tracking is optional; a
contributor can opt not to supply this context of their contribution.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-April/msg00165.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-April/msg00178.html

== Artwork ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Artwork Project.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork

=== The Open Pallete ===

The second part of "The Open Pallete" - a series of articles in Red
Hat Magazine[1] about open source graphics tools - has been published.
This article is titled "Grungy Brushes", and discusses how to create
brushes in Inkscape that can then be used in The Gimp. It's a great
article and well worth a read for any budding (or experienced) open
artists out there! NicuBuculei has also written some follow up
articles which can be found linked from the original post.[2]

[1] http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2007/04/22/the-open-palette-creating-grungy-gimp-brushes-using-inkscape/

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-April/msg00132.html

=== Echo SVG Fixed ===

Following last week's discussions about the problems with the
echo-icon-theme's package size, a lot of work has occurred this week
and all the icons have now been fixed[1]. The fixed icons can be found
on a subpage of the Echo icon's wiki page[2]. It is unlikely that
these updated SVGs can be added to the echo-icon-theme package before
Fedora 7, however, as Fedora is now frozen for release.[3]

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-April/msg00138.html

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork/EchoIconTheme/Cleanup

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-April/msg00139.html

=== Linuxtag Germany ===

GeroldKassube has requested help from the Fedora artwork team with a
brochure and a banner for Linuxtag Germany[1] - one of the larger open
source events in Europe with in excess of 10000 visitors throughout
the week. If you feel you could help, read the post and send your
reply to the Fedora Art list.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-April/msg00126.html

== Security Week ==

In this section, we highlight the security stories from the week in Fedora.

=== Firefox 1.5 Support Extended ===

The biggest security story from last week was the news that the life
of Firefox 1.5 is being extended by upstream until mid-May[1].

The Mozilla project is planning to stop providing official updates for
the 1.5 Firefox branch.  They of course want to put their development
effort into the 2.0 branch.  The current plan for Red Hat and Fedora
is to roll security patches into the 1.5 branch.  Several
distributions are going to work together to keep the 1.5 branch
maintained with security patches since there is great interest in
keeping 1.5 maintained for the immediate future.   Chris Aillon
explains this in a blog posting, "Mozilla Corp. to work more closely
with Linux distributors"[2].

This action shows a huge strength of open source software and security
maintenance.  When a closed source application is distributed, you
have to run whatever version the author wishes you to run.  If an
application has the source available, and the will exists, a version
that no longer receives formal support can live on.

[1] http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=21543

[2] http://christopher.aillon.org/blog/dev/mozilla/20061204-linux-alliance.html

== Security Advisories ==

In this section, we cover Security Advisories from fedora-package-announce.

https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-announce

=== Fedora Core 6 Security Advisories ===

* FEDORA-2007-475 : rdesktop-1.5.0-2.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-475
* FEDORA-2007-473 : avahi-0.6.16-4.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-473
* FEDORA-2007-471 : eclipse-3.2.2-2.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-471
* FEDORA-2007-469 : system-config-date-1.8.12-2.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-469
* FEDORA-2007-449 : policycoreutils-1.34.1-7.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-449
* FEDORA-2007-411 : xsane-0.994-2.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-411
* FEDORA-2007-466 : dovecot-1.0.0-3.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-466
* FEDORA-2007-438 : xterm-225-1.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-438
* FEDORA-2007-456 : httpd-2.2.4-1.fc6 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-456
* FEDORA-2007-465 : m4-1.4.8-2 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC6/FEDORA-2007-465

=== Fedora Core 5 Security Advisories ===

* FEDORA-2007-448 : poppler-0.5.1-3.fc5 -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FSA/FC5/FEDORA-2007-448

== Events and Meetings ==

In this section, we cover event reports and meeting summaries from
various projects.

=== Release Engineering Meeting: 2007-04-23 ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01214.html

=== Packaging Committee Meeting: 2007-04-24 ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-April/msg00507.html

=== Ambassadors Meeting: 2007-04-26 ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-April/msg00350.html

=== French Ambassadors Meeting: 2007-04-29 ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-April/msg00366.html

=== Event Report: CarolinaCon 2007 - North Carolina, USA ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-April/msg00346.html

=== Event Report: FLISOL 2007 - Santiago, Chile ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-April/msg00361.html

=== Event Report: FLISOL 2007 - Salvador, Bahia, Brazil ===

* https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-April/msg00362.html

== Errata ==

From time to time, we issue an Errata to correct Fedora Weekly News[1]
published in previous week. We apologize for any confusion it may
cause. If you feel a news needs to be corrected, please submit an
"Errata Request" to Fedora News Team[2].

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NewsProject

=== Erratum #1 ===

In FWN Issue #84, in the section entitled "Mass Package Rebuilds -
Papering Over Cracks or Shaking the Tree?" we erroneously wrote:

"JohnPoelstra posted details of the Release Engineering Meeting.
ThorstenLeemhuis was against one of the decisions made in the meeting:
the rebuilding en masse of all packages at Test2 release time."

This should have read:

"JohnPoelstra posted details of the Release Engineering Meeting. These
included a note that a mass rebuild of all packages around, but no
later than test2 will be considered in the future.  ThorstenLeemhuis
mentioned in a reply that he was against rebuilding en masse all
packages for each cycle."

=== Erratum #2 ===

In FWN #84, in the section entitled "Packaging Extensions for Mozilla
Applications: Security Implications" we misattributed an opinion to
VilleSkyttä:

"VilleSkyttä remembered a conversation from the past that suggested
there was some interest in packaging the extensions. He was
specifically interested in making it easier to obtain a 64-bit version
of enigmail."

This was in fact ThorstenLeemhuis, not VilleSkyttä.

== Feedback ==

This document is maintained by the Fedora News Team[1]. Please feel
free to contact us to give your feedback. If you'd like to contribute
to a future issue of the Fedora Weekly News, please see the Join[2]
page to find out how to help.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NewsProject

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NewsProject/Join

--
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]