Re: Re: I hereby resign as secretary
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 07:47:50AM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: project atmosphere. The only way we can get things back on track and re-focus our energy on the real reason we are all here... to create a free operating system... I believe that part of the problem is that we are not all here to create a free operating system. I have the impression that some developers merely wish to create an operating system, or perhaps a 'free-enough-for-me' operating system. Thanks Ian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Canonical and Debian
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:55:39PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: both because the overhead of training and coordinating with inexperienced (or, well, inept) coordinators is often higher than just doing all the work yourself, In the short term this is true, but if the amount of work is increasing then there will come a point where just doing all the work yourself is not feasible. If more people gain experience before you reach that point then, well, you don't reach that point because there are 2 (or more) of you to share the work. This also leaves the project in a better position if you wake up one morning and decide to switch to gentoo or whatever. You do still have the problem of distinguishing the inexperienced from the inept, of course. (by you I don't mean you, Steve, of course) Thanks Ian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: status of buildds?
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:51:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: The s390 porting team can perfectly well do what the hurd-i386 porting team does: build them themselves. I mean, umm, you don't have to be hooked into w-b to upload packages. I believe the wanna-build admins don't want builds that have neither been suitably tested (such as the build that accompanies the source in the maintainer's upload) nor built by one of the official buildds to be uploaded. The main reason, AIUI, is that such builds tend to result in a higher proportion of broken packages, partly because the people doing such builds tend to be less up on problems in the tool chain for the arch. That said, I don't believe I've seen a public, first-hand statement to that effect. I think such a statement would be very useful to clear up the confusion on the subject. Thanks Ian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2 new package status pages
Hi all, I have written 2 new package status web pages (one was mentioned on IRC and the other on debian-devel recently). The first: http://people.debian.org/~igloo/status.php gives you the status of all your packages (or an arbitrary list of packages) on all arches. Furthermore, if a package is in state Building then it checks on buildd.d.o to see if the build has finished, and grabs the result (and links to the log if unsuccessful) if so. For an example showing most of it off see http://people.debian.org/~igloo/status_example.html (static copy in case my packages become less interesting :-) ) The second: http://people.debian.org/~igloo/package-status.php gives you the information in the buildd status text files (from buildd.d.o) of all arches for a single package. Probably easier for you to look at it than for me to try to explain it. Bugs reports[0], patches and any other feedback welcomed. Thanks Ian [0] Some people do not seem to be listed on http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?all=1 (possibly they are the rows?). The first page won't work for such people until that is fixed. You can still give your list of packages explicitly, though, or if you give me your address I can add you by hand. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Packages-arch-specific update
Is [EMAIL PROTECTED] the best place to e-mail to get the latest version of Packages-arch-specific in CVS (with some GHC changes) to be used? Thanks Ian, curious as to why debian-autobuild was killed
Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:39:00AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: I also like the idea of rebuilding packages with newer versions of their build-depends (or tool-chain) when a buildd is idle. That too would require a more automatic handling of maybe-successfull builds that won't be uploaded. That would presumably need an additional version number field build version or similar, or you'd have 2 debs with identical version which are different. Perhaps maintainers should upload only binaries with version upstreamv-debv-0 and buildds could then upload upstreamv-debv-buildv with buildv starting at 1. This would also allow the maintainer to immediately provide binaries for any architectures they wish as is possible at the moment, but the buildds for these arches would try to build the packages again anyway. You could even still require a -0 binary be uploaded as is currently the case to be sure that the maintainer has built the package. Ian
Accepted haskell-doc 19991028-3 (all source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 23:15:26 + Source: haskell-doc Binary: haskell-doc Architecture: source all Version: 19991028-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Ian Lynagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: haskell-doc - Assorted Haskell language documentation Closes: 105685 Changes: haskell-doc (19991028-3) unstable; urgency=low . * Change packaging to use debhelper. * Fixed references in Gentle Introduction [Ganesh Sittampalam]. Closes: #105685. * Changed maintainer to Ian Lynagh. * Minor grammatical corrections to description. * Corrected and updated build depends (added flex, debhelper, tetex-bin, fakeroot). Files: 7daaebd2e7217c02c3d95f74691a3c7b 945 doc optional haskell-doc_19991028-3.dsc 4d71b52ff5b54403658a8eda3fbde85a 4718 doc optional haskell-doc_19991028-3.diff.gz f4c4a7c86f843f1cf72f2cdbe9e42bf9 364778 doc optional haskell-doc_19991028-3_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iQEVAwUBPeJ0WKtWU+7O12wBAQFfdAf7B4Ck1mFYDOr6vF1F7e7vszZCW3K1VcTK HcRZtfjG82i+bvFSM+MWthV2gAAoiTI+4dUqWI1nI7kcJ6OkHOhIuj3n53gUg01O CWAcRTtWOSrgOzMpbZctYqectnfpbazj090Qd+iZeX4UKbkQd2rib/EKA7ThmkZs tXh5IbsUIHed/g+jy6J5Ir5EygqPwwSwwg7Ud4E31S6Rj8TIAXaABGNFo9kcjGoz k9JvqqT44PHrzQfE7hEYxbOrzltgNM2Z1z3XgXSrs96ngr7CXuZXL9b1xL8B4EXb bV2OJ52RF9q0dwcoQb/qwIORkEpm1V+87bpN2sMVFGFY+WUtdigAaw== =nPFi -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: haskell-doc_19991028-3.diff.gz to pool/main/h/haskell-doc/haskell-doc_19991028-3.diff.gz haskell-doc_19991028-3.dsc to pool/main/h/haskell-doc/haskell-doc_19991028-3.dsc haskell-doc_19991028-3_all.deb to pool/main/h/haskell-doc/haskell-doc_19991028-3_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: telnet98_98.02.16.orig.tar.gz is wrong
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Fumitoshi UKAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I don't know which (pseudo-)package I should submit to, so I post it to this list. I e-mailed this to a couple of people but got no response. I am no longer the maintainer of this package, but no-one has yet taken it over. Should I upload to fix the problem and change the maintainer to Debian QA at the same time? -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ Two most common elements in the universe: Hydrogen Stupidity.
Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Ossama Othman wrote: GNOME has been copied from the staging area into potato. I believe that just about all of the GNOME packages that I copied into Incoming have been installed into the archive. However, at least two packages should get into the archive before the freeze libgtop1 and libghttp1. These are installed now. I assume the delay with libgtop1 was that it was a new package? If so, please remove libgtop0. Thanks -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
Re: gtop
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Michael Meskes wrote: Where is the gtop binary nowadays? It has been moved outside of gnome and has its own cvs directory. Unfortunately the new maintainer has problems compiling it so it's not likely to meet the freeze date. Yes :-( Any hints gratefully received... -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ Don't you just hate rhetorical questions?
Re: gtop and slink?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I wonder if there will be a new gtop in slink now that it has been moved out of gnome-core (or another core Gnome module). I'm currently having problems compiling libgtop, so it looks unlikely I'll have it done for the freeze :-( -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank.
Re: Copyrights and licenses
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Ian Lynagh writes: So is it free or non-free? If the algorithm isn't patented you can do what ever you want with it, regardless of what the inventor says. OK, that just leaves two questions answered - is srp or SHA non-US and what do I put in the copyright file? Thanks Ian -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ Oxymoron #6: Enough hard drive space
Re: intent to package
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ivan Stojic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Telnet98 I've already taken that one. Sorry :-( -- Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/ My poor mouse only has one ball.
