Hi Graham
On 30 November 2023 at 07:54, Graham Inggs wrote:
| Hi Dirk
|
| On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 00:51, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > Ping squared.
| >
| > If I don't hear from you I may just close this. I believe this (non-, to me)
| > issue has been taken care of. If you think I am wrong
Hi Dirk
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 00:51, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Ping squared.
>
> If I don't hear from you I may just close this. I believe this (non-, to me)
> issue has been taken care of. If you think I am wrong please let me know.
I closed it on 2023-11-24 [1]. Where do you see it still
On 27 November 2023 at 08:27, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| Graham,
|
| Quick ping to ask where we are we on this? Matrix is in testing so can this
| be closed?
Ping squared.
If I don't hear from you I may just close this. I believe this (non-, to me)
issue has been taken care of. If you
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
Hi Andreas
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 13:50, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Looks good. So if I understood correctly we are now rather waiting for
> some infrastructure issues to start the transition and we should simply
> sit-n-wait for the green light, right?
Please go
Hi Graham,
Am Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:29:41AM -0100 schrieb Graham Inggs:
> > for tests that run successfully on all architectures where they are
> > triggered (as in, where at least some of the binaries build by the
> > source are installable). As the failure isn't a regression, the
> >
Hi All
I'm catching up after some AFK time, so I will just fill in some
details where I can.
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 08:31, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > I have no idea why r-cran-seurat is not profiting from reduced waiting
> > time for the transition.
>
> Because its tests fail on armel. The
Hi,
On 28-11-2023 10:10, Andreas Tille wrote:
I have no idea why r-cran-seurat is not profiting from reduced waiting
time for the transition.
Because its tests fail on armel. The reduction of waiting time is only
for tests that run successfully on all architectures where they are
triggered
Hi again,
Am Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 05:20:27PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > > The remaining regressions seen are caused by unrelated uploads of
> > > r-cran-seurat/r-cran-seuratobject on 2023-11-01 and
>
> r-cran-seuratobject 5.0.1-1 has migrated to testing today.
> r-cran-seurat had not
Graham,
Quick ping to ask where we are we on this? Matrix is in testing so can this
be closed?
Cheers, Dirk
--
dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Hi Graham,
Am Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 10:20:38PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > Closing now because there's nothing to be done in rmatrix.
> >
> > The remaining regressions seen are caused by unrelated uploads of
> > r-cran-seurat/r-cran-seuratobject on 2023-11-01 and
r-cran-seuratobject 5.0.1-1
Hi Graham,
Am Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 06:20:01PM -0100 schrieb Graham Inggs:
> I think this means at least r-cran-seuratobject (not r-cran-seurat
> itself) is also in need of your fix [1], if only to silence that
> warning. Would you please take care of that?
Done.
Thanks for checking
Hi Andreas
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 at 13:07, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Since I have no idea what the failures in r-cran-seurat test
> log[6] mean I would prefer to wait until we can upload the latest
> version.
>
>
> [6] https://ci.debian.net/packages/r/r-cran-seurat/unstable/amd64/40043272/
I had a
Hi Graham,
Am Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:21:39PM -0100 schrieb Graham Inggs:
> For the r-cran-tmb upload, I now see only autopkgtest regressions [1] for:
> r-cran-insight/0.19.6+dfsg-1
> r-cran-parameters/0.21.2-1
> I have not investigated, but these seem to be passing in unstable, so
> can be
Hi Graham,
On 20 November 2023 at 12:13, Graham Inggs wrote:
| On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 at 14:59, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > So it contains a patch by Mikael which had been applied _permitting Matrix
| > 1.6-2_ to get to CRAN. So for this particular pair it was the other way
around.
|
| Great,
Hi Andreas
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 at 06:59, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > We liked the change you made to r-cran-tmb [2], as this allows the
> > affected packages to be binNMU'd and gain a versioned dependency on
> > r-cran-matrix. Would you please apply this to the other affected
> > packages (only
Hi Dirk
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 at 14:59, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> So it contains a patch by Mikael which had been applied _permitting Matrix
> 1.6-2_ to get to CRAN. So for this particular pair it was the other way
> around.
Great, thanks for clearing that up.
> So I leave this in your hands.
Hi Graham,
Am Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 01:55:04PM -0100 schrieb Graham Inggs:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 at 19:18, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > We need some means to follow ABI changes. In Debian we could use
> > something like r-matrix-abi-VERSION.
>
> Indeed, this is one solution. As you saw in [1],
On 19 November 2023 at 09:59, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| On 19 November 2023 at 13:49, Graham Inggs wrote:
| | We don't believe only touching debian/changelog, or a binNMU, is
| | sufficient. We were surprised that your r-cran-lme4 upload did not at
| | least include:
| | Depends: r-cran-matrix
Hi Graham,
On 19 November 2023 at 13:49, Graham Inggs wrote:
| On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 12:42, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > Doesn't 'normal' do that?
|
| No, only serious and above are considered RC [1] and also for migration.
|
| This week, Paul Gevers and I spent some time discussing ways to
Hi Andreas
On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 at 19:18, Andreas Tille wrote:
> We need some means to follow ABI changes. In Debian we could use
> something like r-matrix-abi-VERSION.
Indeed, this is one solution. As you saw in [1], upstream now provide
an ABI version and a way to extract it:
> Matrix will
Hi Dirk
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 12:42, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Doesn't 'normal' do that?
No, only serious and above are considered RC [1] and also for migration.
This week, Paul Gevers and I spent some time discussing ways to move
this transition forward.
Referring back to some of your
I will not engage any more with debian-r. But this is now at the BTS so a
clarification may be in order. This started as I had sent an email as a
heads-up to fellow maintainers (via that mostly pointless list) informing
them that their packages would exhibit a bug following a bug in package
Am Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 12:52:29PM -0600 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
> | Anyway. Now that you made it a bug I let you drive this. Upstream just made
> | an unrelated bugfix Matrix 1.6-3 which I just sent to unstable.
>
> There are two known failures left which the maintainer(s) do not want to
On 14 November 2023 at 07:42, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| On 14 November 2023 at 12:26, Graham Inggs wrote:
| | Hi Dirk
| |
| | On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 12:01, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| | > Well that seems to be a) the wrong severity and b) the wrong package.
| |
| | Both are correct. We do
On 14 November 2023 at 12:26, Graham Inggs wrote:
| Hi Dirk
|
| On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 12:01, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > Well that seems to be a) the wrong severity and b) the wrong package.
|
| Both are correct. We do not want rmatrix to migrate and break
| packages in testing.
Doesn't
Hi Dirk
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 12:01, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Well that seems to be a) the wrong severity and b) the wrong package.
Both are correct. We do not want rmatrix to migrate and break
packages in testing.
However, in this case, I only set the severity to match reality;
rmatrix is
On 14 November 2023 at 09:15, Graham Inggs wrote:
| Source: rmatrix
| Version: 1.6-2-1
| Severity: serious
| X-Debbugs-Cc: debia...@lists.debian.org
|
| Hi Dirk
|
| I'm opening this bug as a place for discussion and to track the
| affected packages. It can be closed once rmatrix and its
|
Source: rmatrix
Version: 1.6-2-1
Severity: serious
X-Debbugs-Cc: debia...@lists.debian.org
Hi Dirk
I'm opening this bug as a place for discussion and to track the
affected packages. It can be closed once rmatrix and its
reverse-dependencies are ready to migrate.
I've copied your email to the
28 matches
Mail list logo