Description of problem: i3 version 4.7 was released, Fedora package provides version 4.6. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.6 Additional info: i3 version 4.7 (considered stable) was released. Please consider updating the Fedora package. "This release features a number of documentation improvements, better error messages in various places, better tray compatibility in i3bar, and a number of bugfixes." More information about this release can be found in the announcement: http://infra.in.zekjur.net/archives/i3-announce/2013-December/000042.html Website of the project: http://i3wm.org
Hi Christopher, can you please explain why this is of "high" severity? AFAIK there are no bugs that prevent usage of i3 4.6. Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_Severity for an explanation of how severity is used and what the appropriate values are. "High: the bug makes the program in question unusable, or a major packaging guideline violation (license problem, bundled library, etc)" With that said, I am planning to update to 4.7 but I haven't had time to do so yet. You are free to provide a patch which might make the process faster.
My bad, dunno why the severity was set also. Yesterday I modify some bugs, may got some mistakes. Quoted from upstream: This is the i3 v4.7. This version is considered stable. All users of i3 are strongly encouraged to upgrade. This release features a number of documentation improvements, better error messages in various places, better tray compatibility in i3bar, and a number of bugfixes. Relevant from a packaging point of view is that we have switched to the new xcb-util-cursor library to get rid of libXcursor. The last remaining big piece of Xlib code now is XKB, which we may be able to tackle in upcoming releases thanks to the just released libxcb 1.10.
Also, I don't see any reason of "why not". And there should be no reason of keeping old things. I know 4.6 is stable, but Fedora users want to try out more than RHEL users. Tamas reported this, of course the explicit meaning is that he notified the maintainer to update the package and wanted to try out the new version ASAP. Am I wrong? ;)
Hello Christopher, (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #3) > Also, I don't see any reason of "why not". perhaps the reason is that the maintainer is out of time. Would you be willing to help him out and provide an updated srpm? > And there should be no reason of > keeping old things. I know 4.6 is stable, but Fedora users want to try out > more than RHEL users. I'm sure the users would want the latest and greatest release. The sad thing is that despite making themselves heard, they are not willing to invest their time to make this happen. > Tamas reported this, of course the explicit meaning is that he notified the > maintainer to update the package and wanted to try out the new version ASAP. > > Am I wrong? ;) I agree with you and am looking forward to the updated version. It would suffice to simply add the updated srpm as an attachment to this bug. Looking forward to hearing from you ASAP.
(In reply to Tomas Heinrich from comment #4) > perhaps the reason is that the maintainer is out of time. Would you be > willing to help him out and provide an updated srpm? No. Because I have lots of packages also. > I agree with you and am looking forward to the updated version. It would > suffice to simply add the updated srpm as an attachment to this bug. Looking > forward to hearing from you ASAP. This package does't need too many changes, just bump the version is enough. I may help (comaintainer) when I think I'm free, oops not free currently.
*** Bug 1059579 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I have looked into this and we are missing xcb-util-cursor in rawhide. New i3 versions depend on this helper library and it needs to be reviewed and packaged. Other than that I have done the grunt work regarding the version bump. Any takers of xcb-util-cursor?
(In reply to Martin Preisler from comment #7) > I have looked into this and we are missing xcb-util-cursor in rawhide. New > i3 versions depend on this helper library and it needs to be reviewed and > packaged. Other than that I have done the grunt work regarding the version > bump. > > Any takers of xcb-util-cursor? I can take, but at least you need to wait until Sunday. If you want to take, I can review.
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
xcb-util-cursor is there in Fedora for two weeks now. Is there anything I can do to get the update into Fedora faster? It fixes an annoying bug.
(In reply to Till Maas from comment #10) > xcb-util-cursor is there in Fedora for two weeks now. Is there anything I > can do to get the update into Fedora faster? It fixes an annoying bug. Sure please go ahead.
Christopher, you are one funny guy ;-) I have this building locally, I will build it for rawhide soon. Thanks for the heads up, Till!
(In reply to Martin Preisler from comment #12) > Christopher, you are one funny guy ;-) > > I have this building locally, I will build it for rawhide soon. Thanks for > the heads up, Till! I intended to do this at this weekend(Tomb-sweeping Day recognized by the State Council in China), but since Till has already posted the help I'm willing to let you finish it. BTW based on my free time from now on, I also intend to step down and become the comaintainer of i3, if you want to be the maintainer of it, I will be happy to release the ownership.
(In reply to Martin Preisler from comment #12) > Christopher, you are one funny guy ;-) > > I have this building locally, I will build it for rawhide soon. Thanks for > the heads up, Till! Is there any reason not to update F20 as well?
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=508818 @Christopher: Yeah, Simon orphaned it and sent me an email to take it. You were faster :-) Stepping down after rearranging BuildRequires alphabetically might be too soon. I am OK being the owner but I don't really care to be honest because I have commit and ACL rights either way. @Till: I am using i3 4.6 on F19 daily with no issues. I will do some testing and upgrade F19 and F20 if everything works fine.
i3-4.7.2-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/i3-4.7.2-1.fc20
i3-4.7.2-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/i3-4.7.2-1.fc19
i3-4.7.2-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
i3-4.7.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.