Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Hi, Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past 14 days. * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be affected. * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in testing. Normally, I would manually review[1] the list first before sending it, but I do not have the time for that right now. And one more time to make sure everyone noticed it: *The list is unfiltered and may include entries it should not.* If a package you care for is on this list, please consider looking into these bugs (sooner rather than later). This mail (unlike previous ones) do not include a fixed deadline for these[2], but if time permits I may follow up with deadline and a filtered list. Fun fact: According to UDD[3], 79 RC bugs is a bit over 10% of all RC bugs affecting Jessie. Thanks, ~Niels [1] We normally filter out certain type of RC bugs (incl. but not limited to license issues), where we consider it unreasonable to demand a resolution within the usual deadline (i.e. 14 days of "non-activity" + 7 days after a d-d notice). [2] Note that if some of these packages block transitions, we may end up removing them to finish the transition rather than waiting for you to fix them. [3] http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi?release=jessie&merged=ign&fnewerval=7&rc=1&sortby=id&sorto=asc&chints=1&crttags=1 Abou Al Montacir lazarus (U) Alessio Treglia gengetopt Alexander Wirt conntrack vlock Andreas Tille jellyfish (U) mira (U) Andrew Starr-Bochicchio indicator-applet (U) Antoine Beaupré charybdis Ari Pollak gltron Arno Onken rrep Aron Xu tcpcopy Barak A. Pearlmutter ivtools Bartosz Fenski httpie Bas Wijnen openmsx-catapult Benoit Mortier dapl (U) sdpnetstat (U) Bradley A. Bosch id-utils Carlo Segre horae Carlos Laviola lazarus Charles Plessy mira (U) Chris Grzegorczyk dnsjava Christopher James Halse Rogers gtk-nodoka-engine Clement Lorteau gtkvncviewer Craig Small pidgin-musictracker Cristian Greco qbittorrent Daniel Kahn Gillmor faketime Daniel Leidert (dale) docbook-defguide Daniel Pocock turnserver (U) David Paleino bpython gambas3 (U) gedit-valencia-plugin valatoys David Stone photoprint Debian CLI Applications Team monodevelop-debugger-gdb Debian Games Team xgalaga++ Debian GIS Project ruby-hdfeos5 Debian KDE Extras Team kwin-style-dekorator Debian Med Packaging Team clinica jellyfish mira Debian Mozilla Extension Maintainers torbutton (U) Debian Perl Group libdevel-bt-perl libvideo-fourcc-info-perl perlipq Debian QA Group lastfmsubmitd libpam-unix2 pygmy Debian Science Maintainers imview-doc Debian Science Team dimbl Debian Sympa team sympa Debian Telepathy maintainers ofono Debian VoIP Team libccaudio2 turnserver Didier Raboud kwin-style-dekorator (U) Dirk Eddelbuettel rpy Dominic Hargreaves libgeography-nationalgrid-perl libvideo-fourcc-info-perl (U) Emmanuel Bouthenot sympa (U) Evgeni Golov indicator-application (U) Fernando Tarlá Cardoso Lemos udisks-glue Gambas Debian Maintainers gambas3 Graziano Obertelli dnsjava (U) gregor herrmann perlipq (U) Guy Coates dapl (U) sdpnetstat (U) Hector Oron ofono (U) Ian Haywood gambas3 (U) Jens Peter Secher sml-mode Jo Shields monodevelop-debugger-gdb (U) Joerg Jaspert vlock (U) Jon Ludlam xcp-vncterm (U) Jonas Smedegaard sympa (U) Jonathan McDowell l2tpns Jonathan Yu libvideo-fourcc-info-perl (U) Jonny Lamb ofono (U) Joost van Baal dimbl (U) José L. Redrejo RodrÃguez gambas3 (U) Julien Dutheil bppsuite (U) Jérémy Bobbio torbutton Kilian Krause libccaudio2 (U) Ko van der Sloot dimbl (U) Konstantinos Margaritis ofono (U) Kyo Lee dnsjava (U) Leonardo Robol clinica (U) Loic Dachary bppsuite Loïc Minier mach Ludovic Drolez backuppc Mario Lang dapl (U) emacs-chess sdpnetstat (U) Mark Purcell libccaudio2 (U) Mateusz Kijowski mydumper Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre acct Michael Tautschnig gcc-h8300-hms Michele Martone fim Mickael Profeta prelude-lml (U) prelude-manager (U) Mikolaj Izdebski lbzip2 Mirco Bauer monodevelop-debugger-gdb (U) Muammar El Khatib smc Nicholas Bamber libdevel-bt-perl (U) Nicolas Bourdaud eegdev NIIBE Yutaka cutter-testing-framework Norbert Preining maildir-utils OFED and Debian Developement and Discussion dapl sdpnetstat Peter Howard zoneminder Peter Palfrader tiobench vlo
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Control: severity -1 grave Control: reassign -1 debhelper 9.20130518 Control: affects -1 + src:xgalaga++ Control: tags -1 - jessie The FTBFS bug against xgalaga++ (#707481) is caused by debhelper, it builds fine with debhelper 9.20120909 but not with debhelper 9.20130518. It appears that debhelper is not able to detect the build system any more. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6fc1mikdwrwpbhw5usuceg0xkj213iuwren9ta-v8w...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On 04/06/13 14:06, Niels Thykier wrote: > Hi, > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past >14 days. > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be >affected. > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in >testing. > > Normally, I would manually review[1] the list first before sending it, > but I do not have the time for that right now. And one more time to > make sure everyone noticed it: > > *The list is unfiltered and may include entries it should not.* > > If a package you care for is on this list, please consider looking into > these bugs (sooner rather than later). This mail (unlike previous ones) > do not include a fixed deadline for these[2], but if time permits I may > follow up with deadline and a filtered list. > > Fun fact: According to UDD[3], 79 RC bugs is a bit over 10% of all RC > bugs affecting Jessie. Thanks a lot for this initiative! I hope this leads to a shorter freeze this cycle. Looking forward to other ways to improve our release process. Regards, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51ade918.5020...@debian.org
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Paul Wise wrote: > Control: severity -1 grave > Control: reassign -1 debhelper 9.20130518 > Control: affects -1 + src:xgalaga++ > Control: tags -1 - jessie > > The FTBFS bug against xgalaga++ (#707481) is caused by debhelper, it > builds fine with debhelper 9.20120909 but not with debhelper > 9.20130518. It appears that debhelper is not able to detect the build > system any more. The xgalaga++ rules file does not use dh, nor does it use any dh_auto_*. So how can detection of build system have anything to do with it? You need to do better than that for this to be a valid bug report against debhelper. Even if it were, it's very unlikely it would have RC severity. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Seems I confused xgalaga with xgalaga++, which does use dh. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On 04/06/2013 14:06, Niels Thykier wrote: > Hi, > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past >14 days. Hi, about vlock (I use it), IMO the critical bug should have less severity (not grave, perhaps important). If the package maintainers are busy, I could help them. Cheers, kix -- ||// //\\// Rodolfo "kix" Garcia ||\\// //\\ http://www.kix.es/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51ae1ea2.7040...@kix.es
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On Dienstag, 4. Juni 2013, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Thanks a lot for this initiative! I hope this leads to a shorter freeze > this cycle. +1 - keep the removals coming ;-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Le Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Niels Thykier a écrit : > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past >14 days. > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be >affected. > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in >testing. Thanks a lot. Please do not hesitate to remove leaf packages like mira in an automated manner. Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130605003754.gk7...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On Ma, 04 iun 13, 14:06:26, Niels Thykier wrote: > > [1] We normally filter out certain type of RC bugs (incl. but not > limited to license issues), where we consider it unreasonable to demand > a resolution within the usual deadline (i.e. 14 days of "non-activity" + > 7 days after a d-d notice). Maybe a license/dfsg/etc. tag would be useful? Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Hi, On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 09:37:54AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Niels Thykier a écrit : > > > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past > >14 days. > > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be > >affected. > > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in > >testing. > > Thanks a lot. +1 > Please do not hesitate to remove leaf packages like mira > in an automated manner. ... which does not mean that we (= Debian Med team) are not working on it - we just did not managed to find a solution. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130605111445.gd20...@an3as.eu
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013, "Rodolfo García Peñas (kix)" wrote: > On 04/06/2013 14:06, Niels Thykier wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past > >14 days. > > Hi, > > about vlock (I use it), IMO the critical bug should have less severity > (not grave, perhaps important). > > If the package maintainers are busy, I could help them. There are not much of us left (in fact I am the last one), so any help would be appreciated (*hint* a co-maintainer would be nice). Alex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130605161543.ga20...@smithers.snow-crash.org
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Hi, On 04-06-13 14:06, Niels Thykier wrote: > [1] We normally filter out certain type of RC bugs (incl. but not > limited to license issues), where we consider it unreasonable to demand > a resolution within the usual deadline (i.e. 14 days of "non-activity" + > 7 days after a d-d notice). > # #708695 > remove lazarus/0.9.30.4-7 Abou and I are working on this license issue. It is rather simple, but we want to fix it in a new upstream upload (with repack). Should I instead bother the buildd's with a quick repack, when probably this weekend we are going to upload a new version? Or is it enough to tag the bug report with pending (I am doing that anyway)? Paul P.s. I like this continuation of the freeze way of working. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
On 05-06-13 18:30, Michael Tautschnig wrote: >> I also like it, somewhat, but am also aware of this approach rendering >> unstable more stable than testing. I would prefer another kind of punishment >> for neglect / some difficulty than the mere removal. > > In what way exactly would this effort even affect unstable? It doesn't, that's the point. > Note that this is > about removal from *testing*, thus should rather remove the number of bugs in > testing, not necessarily in unstable!? But it does mean that the number of packages in testing is in flux a bit more than those in unstable. That may make it somewhat less "stable", depending on definition. -- This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you will not go to space today. -- http://xkcd.com/1133/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Aw: Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Hi, > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 09:37:54AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Le Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Niels Thykier a écrit : > > > > > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > > > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > > > > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > > > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past > > >14 days. > > > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be > > >affected. > > > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > > > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in > > >testing. > > > > Thanks a lot. > > +1 I also like it, somewhat, but am also aware of this approach rendering unstable more stable than testing. I would prefer another kind of punishment for neglect / some difficulty than the mere removal. > > Please do not hesitate to remove leaf packages like mira > > in an automated manner. > > ... which does not mean that we (= Debian Med team) are not working on > it - we just did not managed to find a solution. I was not aware of it. And even that I am now, I do not have the time to address this within the next 14 days. So, hm, ... those 14 days are truly challenging. Steffen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/trinity-ae369310-002e-4f23-9c9f-acfeeca278ba-1370441714196@3capp-gmx-bs01
Re: Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
> Hi, > > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 09:37:54AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > Le Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Niels Thykier a écrit : > > > > > > > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > > > > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > > > > > > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > > > > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past > > > >14 days. > > > > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be > > > >affected. > > > > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > > > > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in > > > >testing. > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > +1 > > I also like it, somewhat, but am also aware of this approach rendering > unstable more stable than testing. I would prefer another kind of punishment > for neglect / some difficulty than the mere removal. > [...] In what way exactly would this effort even affect unstable? Note that this is about removal from *testing*, thus should rather remove the number of bugs in testing, not necessarily in unstable!? Best, Michael pgpOdFpVaowil.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2013-06-04)
Le Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 04:15:14PM +0200, "Steffen Möller" a écrit : > > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 09:37:54AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > Le Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Niels Thykier a écrit : > > > > > > > > Our automated tools for finding RC buggy leaf packages in testing have > > > > found 79 potential candidates (see attached files). > > > > > > > > The packages have been selected based on the following criteria: > > > > * The package had at least one RC bug without activity for the past > > > >14 days. > > > > * If a bug is assigned to multiple packages, both packages will be > > > >affected. > > > > * The RC bug affects both unstable and testing. > > > > * The affected package does not have any reverse dependencies in > > > >testing. > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > +1 > > I also like it, somewhat, but am also aware of this approach rendering > unstable more stable than testing. I would prefer another kind of punishment > for neglect / some difficulty than the mere removal. Hi Steffen and everybody, it is not a punishment, it is just reflecting that if the bug is not fixed, then the package can not be released. The package is still in Stable (where it is not affected by the bug), therefore our users have a good access to it. Maybe this is a good criterion to add ? If a leaf package with a RC bug is present at the same version in Stable and is not affected there, then it can be removed without discussion ? Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130605213915.gb26...@falafel.plessy.net
