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
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
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: 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: 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: 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: 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
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=jessiemerged=ignfnewerval=7rc=1sortby=idsorto=ascchints=1crttags=1 Abou Al Montacir abou.almonta...@sfr.fr lazarus (U) Alessio Treglia ales...@debian.org gengetopt Alexander Wirt formo...@debian.org conntrack vlock Andreas Tille ti...@debian.org jellyfish (U) mira (U) Andrew Starr-Bochicchio a.star...@gmail.com indicator-applet (U) Antoine Beaupré anar...@debian.org charybdis Ari Pollak a...@debian.org gltron Arno Onken asn...@asnelt.org rrep Aron Xu a...@debian.org tcpcopy Barak A. Pearlmutter b...@debian.org ivtools Bartosz Fenski fe...@debian.org httpie Bas Wijnen wij...@debian.org openmsx-catapult Benoit Mortier benoit.mort...@opensides.be dapl (U) sdpnetstat (U) Bradley A. Bosch b...@debian.org id-utils Carlo Segre se...@debian.org horae Carlos Laviola clavi...@debian.org lazarus Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org mira (U) Chris Grzegorczyk g...@eucalyptus.com dnsjava Christopher James Halse Rogers r...@ubuntu.com gtk-nodoka-engine Clement Lorteau northern_lig...@users.sourceforge.net gtkvncviewer Craig Small csm...@debian.org pidgin-musictracker Cristian Greco crist...@debian.org qbittorrent Daniel Kahn Gillmor d...@fifthhorseman.net faketime Daniel Leidert (dale) daniel.leid...@wgdd.de docbook-defguide Daniel Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au turnserver (U) David Paleino da...@debian.org bpython gambas3 (U) gedit-valencia-plugin valatoys David Stone da...@nnucomputerwhiz.com photoprint Debian CLI Applications Team pkg-cli-apps-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org monodevelop-debugger-gdb Debian Games Team pkg-games-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org xgalaga++ Debian GIS Project pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org ruby-hdfeos5 Debian KDE Extras Team pkg-kde-ext...@lists.alioth.debian.org kwin-style-dekorator Debian Med Packaging Team debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org clinica jellyfish mira Debian Mozilla Extension Maintainers pkg-mozext-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org torbutton (U) Debian Perl Group pkg-perl-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org libdevel-bt-perl libvideo-fourcc-info-perl perlipq Debian QA Group packa...@qa.debian.org lastfmsubmitd libpam-unix2 pygmy Debian Science Maintainers debian-science-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org imview-doc Debian Science Team debian-science-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org dimbl Debian Sympa team pkg-sympa-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org sympa Debian Telepathy maintainers pkg-telepathy-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org ofono Debian VoIP Team pkg-voip-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org libccaudio2 turnserver Didier Raboud did...@raboud.com kwin-style-dekorator (U) Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org rpy Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li libgeography-nationalgrid-perl libvideo-fourcc-info-perl (U) Emmanuel Bouthenot kol...@debian.org sympa (U) Evgeni Golov evg...@debian.org indicator-application (U) Fernando Tarlá Cardoso Lemos fernando...@gmail.com udisks-glue Gambas Debian Maintainers pkg-gambas-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org gambas3 Graziano Obertelli grazi...@eucalyptus.com dnsjava (U) gregor herrmann gre...@debian.org perlipq (U) Guy Coates g...@sanger.ac.uk dapl (U) sdpnetstat (U) Hector Oron zu...@debian.org ofono (U) Ian Haywood i...@haywood.id.au gambas3 (U) Jens Peter Secher j...@debian.org
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
