On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:29:11AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Some upstreams have a testing branch of there software and a
release branch. It's sometimes useful to have people test the
version in from the testing branch, and having it available in
Debian makes it easier for people to test it.
Hi,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:01:38PM +0200, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Hi,
Based on some informal queries a little while ago, the weekend of 15/16
June looks like a good date for the first wheezy point release. Would
Hi,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:01:38PM +0200, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Hi,
Based on some informal queries a little while ago, the weekend of 15/16
June looks like a good date for the first wheezy point release. Would
Hi,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:01:38PM +0200, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Hi,
Based on some informal queries a little while ago, the weekend of 15/16
June looks like a good date for the first wheezy point release. Would
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:07:42AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Neil McGovern, le Tue 07 May 2013 11:14:01 +0100, a écrit :
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months,
so it is basically network
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:33:03PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Neil McGovern, le Wed 08 May 2013 11:35:52 +0100, a écrit :
But not tested - how about USB - did that ever get sorted?
We have not worked on it.
How about things like wireless drivers, raid controllers,
suspend/resume
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:07:42AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Neil McGovern, le Tue 07 May 2013 11:14:01 +0100, a écrit :
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months,
so it is basically network
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:33:03PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Neil McGovern, le Wed 08 May 2013 11:35:52 +0100, a écrit :
But not tested - how about USB - did that ever get sorted?
We have not worked on it.
How about things like wireless drivers, raid controllers,
suspend/resume
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months,
so it is basically network board drivers from linux 2.6.32, and IDE
disk support. I for instance installed it on my Dell D430, and network
just works fine.
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months,
so it is basically network board drivers from linux 2.6.32, and IDE
disk support. I for instance installed it on my Dell D430, and network
just works fine.
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
So, release people: How likely is it that Hurd gets added to jessie?
Within the next one or two months I mean, not maybe in a years
time. :)
I don't see it happening, to be honest.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 05:15:44PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
Percentage built, percentage up to date, and (as far as I know) a
working port and installer for a modern desktop machine?
Um, having read back the above, it may have sounded a bit more curt than
I was expecting, apologies! Those
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:36:55AM -0400, Barry deFreese wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
OK, I have been significantly out of the loop for a while now but what
do you base that on?
What requirements are we still falling short on?
Percentage built, percentage up to date, and (as
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
So, release people: How likely is it that Hurd gets added to jessie?
Within the next one or two months I mean, not maybe in a years
time. :)
I don't see it happening, to be honest.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:39:53PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
I'm hereby CC'ing pr...@debian.org. We'll have debian-devel-announce, debconf-
announce, debian-news and debian-events-eu as targets for this announcement,
reply-to set to debconf-discuss. So press@: what is needed from the
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 04:25:42PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Timo Juhani Lindfors timo.lindf...@iki.fi, 2013-04-22, 13:22:
Thorsten, you should have kept your custom debian/rules. If it
prevented incompetent developers from NMUing the package, then
all good for you and for Debian.
Was there
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:19:48PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 04/24/2013 10:39 PM, Neil McGovern wrote:
I'm sorry, but can I just clarify: do you think that it's an advantage
that your custom debian/rules prevents others from understanding your
package?
I don't think anyone ever
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 01:25:00AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 04/25/2013 12:10 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
If you're deliberately obfuscating debian/rules when there's no or very
little advantage, then you shouldn't be producing the package.
I'm not the one claiming that using echo and cat
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:58:33PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
But for new packages, where Canonical is striking out on its own
to deliver significant new functionality and the folks working on these
packages are not DDs, there's a clear pragmatic
Hi Marco,
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 04:14:13AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Yes, but they are all trivial changes.
[...]
OK, I suck as a maintainer and as a human being and I neglected my
packages for most of the last year.
But I'd rather move on and fix what can still be fixed.
[...]
Why?
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 07:09:50PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
Assuming Debian keyring refers to the package debian-keyring (which should
be a reasonable safe assumption, right?)
This assumption is incorrect: the Debian keyring is defined by devotee
for the leader2013 vote as:
cat
Hi Marco,
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 04:14:13AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Yes, but they are all trivial changes.
[...]
OK, I suck as a maintainer and as a human being and I neglected my
packages for most of the last year.
But I'd rather move on and fix what can still be fixed.
[...]
Why?
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
So, transitions could be avoided in a social way. No need for a freeze.
Let's see how well that works - look at the very first message in this
thread.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: enigma
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
Looks like Enigma 1.20 has been released!
Could the package be updated (probably after the freeze)?
Thanks,
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
It is not. You can't reasonably install things from experimental rather
than unstable by default, nor is there a flag for this really should be
in unstable if not for badly managed release
I'm getting rather annoyed by this
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 05:48:13PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Neil McGovern wrote:
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 02:38:51PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
It is unreasonable to tell the users and upstreams that Debian is
going to keep users on a known inferior version by default for a long
time
tags 698117 moreinfo
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org
usertags 671635 wheezy-will-remove
thanks
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 02:51:36PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The time spent by the RM and the maintainer to prepare and accept the tpu
upload is higher than adding a simple unblock
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org
usertags 678979 wheezy-will-remove
thanks
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:44:15PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 11:38 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 14:30 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 21/09/2012 04:58, Peter
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org
usertags 678979 wheezy-will-remove
thanks
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:44:15PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 11:38 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 14:30 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 21/09/2012 04:58, Peter
tags 698117 moreinfo
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org
usertags 671635 wheezy-will-remove
thanks
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 02:51:36PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The time spent by the RM and the maintainer to prepare and accept the tpu
upload is higher than adding a simple unblock
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org
usertags 678979 wheezy-will-remove
thanks
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:44:15PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 11:38 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 14:30 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 21/09/2012 04:58, Peter
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 08:13:02PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I think I would generally be fine about an informational message in
Debian Project News about an fundraising campaign for something that
clearly benefits Debian. Btw, in the specific example of your book, have
you considered
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 11:02:06AM +, Moray Allan wrote:
I nominate myself as a prospective DPL for the 2013 election.
Thanks, received and is a valid nomination.
Neil
(as Assistant Secretary)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 09:44:32AM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx secret...@debian.org writes:
Please make sure that nominations are sent to (or cc:'d to)
debian-vote, and are cryptographically signed.
*clears throat*
I hereby nominate myself as a
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:50:51PM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
Instead the next suggestion was documenting this issue in the Wheey
errata [2], but I don't see network- manager or wicd mentioned there,
nor mentioned in the Installation Guide [3] for Wheezy.
I'm guessing that's because no one
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:39:44PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
On 27.02.2013 00:50, Chris Knadle wrote:
When this was brought up in the bug report, the response was
network-manager
can be installed, then disabled, but how to do that wasn't documented
anywhere in the network-manager
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:50:51PM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
Instead the next suggestion was documenting this issue in the Wheey
errata [2], but I don't see network- manager or wicd mentioned there,
nor mentioned in the Installation Guide [3] for Wheezy.
I'm guessing that's because no one
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:39:44PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
On 27.02.2013 00:50, Chris Knadle wrote:
When this was brought up in the bug report, the response was
network-manager
can be installed, then disabled, but how to do that wasn't documented
anywhere in the network-manager
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:50:51PM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
Instead the next suggestion was documenting this issue in the Wheey
errata [2], but I don't see network- manager or wicd mentioned there,
nor mentioned in the Installation Guide [3] for Wheezy.
I'm guessing that's because no one
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:39:44PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
On 27.02.2013 00:50, Chris Knadle wrote:
When this was brought up in the bug report, the response was
network-manager
can be installed, then disabled, but how to do that wasn't documented
anywhere in the network-manager
may lack the
knowledge how to correctly create init scripts.)
For clarity - considering this used to work without having the above, I
consider this to be a release critical issue for Wheezy. Thus, it needs
fixing somehow or isdnutils will be removed from the release.
Neil McGovern
Release
may lack the
knowledge how to correctly create init scripts.)
For clarity - considering this used to work without having the above, I
consider this to be a release critical issue for Wheezy. Thus, it needs
fixing somehow or isdnutils will be removed from the release.
Neil McGovern
Release
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:42:14AM +0100, alberto fuentes wrote:
Since its being a while without response and we are getting closer to
release, i was thinking about requesting a wheezy-ignore for the bug or
something to the release team
I'm not happy adding an ignore tag if there isn't any
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:20:56AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
If it is essential, I can make a 0.8.1-13 upload with the extra
changelog detail against 0.8.1-11
Hi,
We won't accept any changes to packaging systems, and we won't review
anything without a diff. PLEASE go read
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:35:16AM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 09:54:36AM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote:
+netgen (4.9.13.dfsg-3.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
Have the maintainers commented on your proposed change?
Control: tag 540512 +wheezy-ignore
Control: tag 538822 +wheezy-ignore
This is obviously not going to get fixed this time. Adding ignore tags.
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:40:58PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
There has been a small discussion about dash RC bugs 538822 and 540512
in the bts and the
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 09:56:08PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Removal hint added.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 02:46:29PM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote:
thanks for looking into this bug. VCS of coin3d has a COPYING file, which
is clearly BSD-license [1]. So this version should be packaged to fix
the license issue properly. The current version of coin is GPL [2].
This doesn't
Package: metacafe-dl
Version: 2008.07.23-2
Severity: grave
Hi,
metacafe-dl doesn't seem to work anymore, possibly due to #688997.
In any case, metacafe-dl is currently a candidate to be removed from
wheezy unless something is fixed.
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT
Package: freevo
Severity: grave
Hi,
Youtube-dl is about to be removed from testing. As freevo depends on it,
it is also a candidate for removal. Please let
debian-rele...@lists.debian.org know how you plan on handling this
issue.
Thanks,
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:42:14AM +0100, alberto fuentes wrote:
Since its being a while without response and we are getting closer to
release, i was thinking about requesting a wheezy-ignore for the bug or
something to the release team
I'm not happy adding an ignore tag if there isn't any
Control: tag 570516 +wheezy-ignore
This probably isn't going to get fixed, even if it still exists. Tagging
wheezy-ignore.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:38:27PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I simply haven't included any patches with any prior version of the
package, so I haven't needed to rely on any 1.0 or 3.0 methods for
including a patch
Again, I'm going to point at the freeze policy. Specifically Rule 1.
I've
Control: notfound #681138 4.0.4debian2
I couldn't reproduce this in 4.0.4debian2, marking as such.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 12:39:35PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
On 11/11/2012 11:26 AM, intrigeri wrote:
Anything left to be done before filing an unblock request?
like said, when live-build has been updated, syslinux-themes will be
updated too, and then someone can ask for unblocks.
The
Control: fixed #681138 4.0.4debian2-3.2
Apparently the below doesn't work. So I'm marking it as fixed. *sigh*
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 03:09:09PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing control commands:
notfound #681138 4.0.4debian2
Bug #681138 {Done: Thomas Mueller
Control: tag -1 +wheezy-ignore
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 07:15:49PM +, Robert Lemmen wrote:
b) the release team could decide to simply wheezy-ignore this bug since
a fixed version is in unstable and this is only a DFSG-problem, i.e.
something we *decide* we don't want in main rather than
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 04:26:53PM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
The fix is to add missing dependency on xz-utils.
Also a unit tests is added explicitly testing xz compressed deb.
This doesn't look clean due to changes in:
---
Control: tag -1 +wheezy-ignore
This doesn't seem to actually affect wheezy in a user-environment. Thus
adding wheezy-ignore tag.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Control: tag 540512 +wheezy-ignore
Control: tag 538822 +wheezy-ignore
This is obviously not going to get fixed this time. Adding ignore tags.
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:40:58PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
There has been a small discussion about dash RC bugs 538822 and 540512
in the bts and the
Package: metacafe-dl
Version: 2008.07.23-2
Severity: grave
Hi,
metacafe-dl doesn't seem to work anymore, possibly due to #688997.
In any case, metacafe-dl is currently a candidate to be removed from
wheezy unless something is fixed.
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT
Package: freevo
Severity: grave
Hi,
Youtube-dl is about to be removed from testing. As freevo depends on it,
it is also a candidate for removal. Please let
debian-rele...@lists.debian.org know how you plan on handling this
issue.
Thanks,
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:42:14AM +0100, alberto fuentes wrote:
Since its being a while without response and we are getting closer to
release, i was thinking about requesting a wheezy-ignore for the bug or
something to the release team
I'm not happy adding an ignore tag if there isn't any
Control: tag 570516 +wheezy-ignore
This probably isn't going to get fixed, even if it still exists. Tagging
wheezy-ignore.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Control: notfound #681138 4.0.4debian2
I couldn't reproduce this in 4.0.4debian2, marking as such.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 12:39:35PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
On 11/11/2012 11:26 AM, intrigeri wrote:
Anything left to be done before filing an unblock request?
like said, when live-build has been updated, syslinux-themes will be
updated too, and then someone can ask for unblocks.
The
Control: fixed #681138 4.0.4debian2-3.2
Apparently the below doesn't work. So I'm marking it as fixed. *sigh*
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 03:09:09PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing control commands:
notfound #681138 4.0.4debian2
Bug #681138 {Done: Thomas Mueller
Control: tag -1 +wheezy-ignore
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 07:15:49PM +, Robert Lemmen wrote:
b) the release team could decide to simply wheezy-ignore this bug since
a fixed version is in unstable and this is only a DFSG-problem, i.e.
something we *decide* we don't want in main rather than
Control: tag -1 +wheezy-ignore
This doesn't seem to actually affect wheezy in a user-environment. Thus
adding wheezy-ignore tag.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:20:56AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
If it is essential, I can make a 0.8.1-13 upload with the extra
changelog detail against 0.8.1-11
Hi,
We won't accept any changes to packaging systems, and we won't review
anything without a diff. PLEASE go read
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:35:16AM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 09:54:36AM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote:
+netgen (4.9.13.dfsg-3.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
Have the maintainers commented on your proposed change?
Control: tag 540512 +wheezy-ignore
Control: tag 538822 +wheezy-ignore
This is obviously not going to get fixed this time. Adding ignore tags.
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:40:58PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
There has been a small discussion about dash RC bugs 538822 and 540512
in the bts and the
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 09:56:08PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Removal hint added.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 02:46:29PM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote:
thanks for looking into this bug. VCS of coin3d has a COPYING file, which
is clearly BSD-license [1]. So this version should be packaged to fix
the license issue properly. The current version of coin is GPL [2].
This doesn't
Package: freevo
Severity: grave
Hi,
Youtube-dl is about to be removed from testing. As freevo depends on it,
it is also a candidate for removal. Please let
debian-release@lists.debian.org know how you plan on handling this
issue.
Thanks,
Neil
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:25:14PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
what's the release team opinion on fixing several important bugs for
wheezy? These are problems discovered by piuparts and all have bugs
filed long ago, usually with a sentence like Getting the archive
piuparts-clean is a
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:38:27PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I simply haven't included any patches with any prior version of the
package, so I haven't needed to rely on any 1.0 or 3.0 methods for
including a patch
Again, I'm going to point at the freeze policy. Specifically Rule 1.
I've
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 04:26:53PM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
The fix is to add missing dependency on xz-utils.
Also a unit tests is added explicitly testing xz compressed deb.
This doesn't look clean due to changes in:
---
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 09:14:19PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Actually, it is very likely to end up being the same people (after
all, those are the people who have the connections to industry), it's
just that their focus would change to cover the whole of Debian and
the subsequent 1 or 2
Hi all,
I've had a press contact requesting information about if/when secure
boot will be available. Has anyone got any more info? Replies to me
privately please.
Thanks,
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
Of course there was a reason for introducing testing. And I did not
propose it to go away either. It should stay for packages marked as
being part of unstable at freeze time. Probably a separate repo for
frozen unstable is needed.
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:26:37PM +0100, Thomas Girard wrote:
Since my GPG key has expired, I will not be able to upload this in a
timely fashion, so you can consider this email as a call for NMU.
For info, you can simply change the expiration date...
Neil
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:26:37PM +0100, Thomas Girard wrote:
Since my GPG key has expired, I will not be able to upload this in a
timely fashion, so you can consider this email as a call for NMU.
For info, you can simply change the expiration date...
Neil
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:26:37PM +0100, Thomas Girard wrote:
Since my GPG key has expired, I will not be able to upload this in a
timely fashion, so you can consider this email as a call for NMU.
For info, you can simply change the expiration date...
Neil
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi,
365 files changed, 23718 insertions(+), 14033 deletions(-)
This isn't something that can be reviewed, especially with the large
number of unrelated changes to (for example build system switch!) the
package.
The options remaining are:
* Backport specific fixes for the version in testing
*
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 02:40:25PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
As I've stated previously, I don't believe that backporting fixes is
really feasible. There are too many, they are mixed with
non-security-related modifications, there would be enormous opportunity
for error, and ongoing
Hi,
365 files changed, 23718 insertions(+), 14033 deletions(-)
This isn't something that can be reviewed, especially with the large
number of unrelated changes to (for example build system switch!) the
package.
The options remaining are:
* Backport specific fixes for the version in testing
*
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 02:40:25PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
As I've stated previously, I don't believe that backporting fixes is
really feasible. There are too many, they are mixed with
non-security-related modifications, there would be enormous opportunity
for error, and ongoing
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 03:55:22AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Wouldn't it be more simple to just choose a name and we would never ever
have to talk about it again, and never ever have to process any of such
unblocks?
Sure thing: The next release after Jessie will be called Thomas. [0]
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Hallo,
* Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]:
any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying
not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with
(what will become) stable.
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Hallo,
* Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]:
any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying
not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with
(what will become) stable.
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Hallo,
* Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]:
any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying
not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with
(what will become) stable.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:41:11AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Since we'll have released by then[1], I thought it might be nice if you
guys were to hold a talk at FOSDEM about the past release process and/or
the upcoming one. Anyone up for that?
I won't be attending this year - anyone
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Hallo,
* Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]:
any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying
not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with
(what will become) stable.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:26:53PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
- rather than publicly disclosing all the details, it may be possible to
identify somebody outside the DebConf team that all of us trust who can
gather the facts confidentially and report relevant facts publicly
For information,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:14:41PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:39:06PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
In meanwhile I think the debdiff is too huge to have this for an
unblock to wheezy. I suggest to close this request to reduce the
current open unblock
tags 591969 + wheezy-ignore
thanks
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:56:11PM +0100, Christian Welzel wrote:
Am 05.12.2012 13:07, schrieb Neil McGovern:
Can someone explain: 1) Why there were no updates to the bug
between December 2010 and June 2012?
The bug could not be resolved, so i didnt
tags 591969 + wheezy-ignore
thanks
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:56:11PM +0100, Christian Welzel wrote:
Am 05.12.2012 13:07, schrieb Neil McGovern:
Can someone explain: 1) Why there were no updates to the bug
between December 2010 and June 2012?
The bug could not be resolved, so i didnt
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 08:01:58PM +0100, Tobias Hansen wrote:
the discussion in RC bug #591969 ended with a call for a wheezy-ignore
tag. The bug was also tagged squeeze-ignore. What does the release team say?
In general, I'm fairly loathed to add a *second* release ignore tag.
Can someone
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 08:01:58PM +0100, Tobias Hansen wrote:
the discussion in RC bug #591969 ended with a call for a wheezy-ignore
tag. The bug was also tagged squeeze-ignore. What does the release team say?
In general, I'm fairly loathed to add a *second* release ignore tag.
Can someone
401 - 500 of 1882 matches
Mail list logo
