On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 02:18:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:36AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > This is a two-way street though. Aurelien was trying to solve a problem
> > he perceived to exist with the arm port. His solution has been rejected,
> > but is the or
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:36AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> This is a two-way street though. Aurelien was trying to solve a problem
> he perceived to exist with the arm port. His solution has been rejected,
> but is the original problem being addressed?
] I am really upset by the way the ARM
Neil McGovern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:58:46AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > What says SPI only listens to the DPL, not the project? AIUI, the DPL
> > is appointed as an adviser to SPI's board, not a veto.
>
> Further down the resolution, which you snipped:
> snip -
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 07:35:49PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:15:51AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > > Considering any DD has the ability to introduce any kind of malware
> > > and/or kill (almost) any debian.org server, yes, a little bit of trust
> > > would
> The greater question is, if the archive masters request
> developers not to submit packages built on emulated hardware, should
> that request not be heeded?
No, why would that be within the bailiwick of the ftp-team? If you're
going to claim that they have ultimate authority over all
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 10:20:12 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The discussion is either it is as reliable to use emulator (QEMU in
> particular) as the real box. You brought an example where build
> process under emulator failed. I mentioned that it might be not
> emulator fa
[Please respond back to -vote where this belongs, not here.]
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Joe Buck wrote:
> Right now, those who run auto-builders are trusted, but the GR
> proposes to trust all developers. Right?
It doesn't really change anything because nothing stops you as a
developer from uploading b
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:58:46AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > > Could be at the request of the Project, via a GR I think, if the DPL
> > > was, say, unwilling to act and fix a broken situation wrt
> > > infrastructure administration
Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> On Monday 12 February 2007 09:08, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > [...] reproducibility will suffer. The fact that it failed to run the
> > binary correctly in this failure instance is good. But another day, it
> > may fail to correctly run gcc, and that would be bad if it exi
On Monday 12 February 2007 09:08, Stephen Gran wrote:
> [...] reproducibility will suffer. The fact that it failed to run the
> binary correctly in this failure instance is good. But another day, it
> may fail to correctly run gcc, and that would be bad if it exited 0 with
> a wrongly built binar
This one time, at band camp, Yaroslav Halchenko said:
> > It was a mail to -devel, and I mispoke, it was aranym, not qemu,
> ;-) ok - getting closer to the true story here, but unfortunately I
> could not locate any 'failed build' email in the -devel from him within
> any reasonable timeframe where
> It was a mail to -devel, and I mispoke, it was aranym, not qemu,
;-) ok - getting closer to the true story here, but unfortunately I
could not locate any 'failed build' email in the -devel from him within
any reasonable timeframe where he would mentioned failed build. But I've
found
http://lists.
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > Could be at the request of the Project, via a GR I think, if the DPL
> > was, say, unwilling to act and fix a broken situation wrt
> > infrastructure administration and developer access to the said
> > infrastructure.
>
> Unlikel
Hello,
if you follow -project, you know that I have the project to present myself
for the DPL election this year provided that I can setup a good DPL board.
See http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/02/msg00061.html
I have privately contacted some people that I would like to see on such a
b
Le lundi 12 février 2007 à 19:35 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> > There are different levels of trusting. One can think that no DD
> > would introduce malware in the archive and anyway could think also that
> > some
> > developers are not good for certain tasks because of attitude/lack of
> >
This one time, at band camp, Yaroslav Halchenko said:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > ballombe has already found differences between an emulated environment
> > and a real cpu, where the test suite failed on qemu and passed on a real
> > cpu. I have no confidence that it can't fail
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:15:51AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > Considering any DD has the ability to introduce any kind of malware
> > and/or kill (almost) any debian.org server, yes, a little bit of trust
> > would be a minimum.
> There are different levels of trusting. One can think
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:38:42PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:59:41PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The context doesn't make the above quote any more pleasant.
> >
> > Well, in an ideal world ever
18 matches
Mail list logo
