Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please see inside!)
Hi Jonathan, On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 04:01:47PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: I would accept the Uploaders fix and the other documentation fixes along with it, but not the standards version. Can you prepare a debdiff before uploading and send it to this bug please? Thank you, looking at it now. Would you accept the following documentation fixes too: removing dm-upload-allowed; adding a provides: doom-engine (closes: #692762)? If so, I can work from the git master where they've been addressed; otherwise I'll cherry pick the fixes that I mentioned in the -release mail from November. Sorry if it seems like I'm moving the goal posts here, that wasn't my intention when I fixed those bugs in git, honest! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130205211223.GF21754@debian
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (2012-11-30)
Thanks for the update! -- I pledge not to post to any systemd-related thread on -devel until (at least) 2013. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121130163906.GA21619@debian
Re: Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please see inside!)
Hi, just a ping for this - I hadn't filed a bug for the issue that the unblock would resolve, I have now - #694520 On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 09:53:38PM +, Jon Dowland wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi, I've just uploaded chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2, with one fix, a documentation fix only: * Add myself back to uploaders. 1.7.0-1 has no humans in Maintainer and no Uploaders which is a policy violation. HOWEVER! There are a number of other documentation problems in chocolate-doom which I could fix, if the release team would approve them for wheezy. They are: obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright maintainer upstream-contact (paragraph at line 1) obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright name upstream-name (paragraph at line 1) obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright format-specification format (paragraph at line 1) comma-separated-files-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at line 19 missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright public domain (paragraph at line 69) duplicate-changelog-files usr/share/doc/chocolate-doom/ChangeLog.gz usr/share/doc/chocolate-doom/changelog.gz If the release team would be prepared to accept fixes for the above into wheezy, I'll do a -3 upload to unstable fixing them all. Please only unblock -2 if you are happy to fix the Uploaders issue *but not* any of the above. FINALLY! I could also fix out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.1 (current is 3.9.3) at the same time, which is almost certainly only a documentation fix too, but for some reason I'd be more hesitant to do that. Thank you in advance. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121106215338.ga5...@ubik.ncl.ac.uk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121127101840.GA8359@debian
Re: Bug#693475: unblock: evince/3.4.0-3.1
Sorry if it doesn't make sense for me to ask this here, but: On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 01:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: -Uploaders: Frederic Peters fpet...@debian.org, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org +Uploaders: Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org Was that meant to be in there? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121119192035.GA25842@debian
Re: Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please see inside!)
Hi folks, On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 09:53:38PM +, Jon Dowland wrote: 1.7.0-1 has no humans in Maintainer and no Uploaders which is a policy violation. ^^ I believe this is ≥ important and so qualifies for the release policy update on November 8th, I could fix, if the release team would approve them for wheezy. They are: ^^ these would not. Can you please clarify whether the updated policy applies to pending unblock requests filed *prior* to the policy update? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121108175547.GC3915@debian
Re: Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please see inside!)
Neil clarified on -devel. Thanks! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121108203612.GD11858@debian
Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please see inside!)
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi, I've just uploaded chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2, with one fix, a documentation fix only: * Add myself back to uploaders. 1.7.0-1 has no humans in Maintainer and no Uploaders which is a policy violation. HOWEVER! There are a number of other documentation problems in chocolate-doom which I could fix, if the release team would approve them for wheezy. They are: obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright maintainer upstream-contact (paragraph at line 1) obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright name upstream-name (paragraph at line 1) obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright format-specification format (paragraph at line 1) comma-separated-files-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at line 19 missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright public domain (paragraph at line 69) duplicate-changelog-files usr/share/doc/chocolate-doom/ChangeLog.gz usr/share/doc/chocolate-doom/changelog.gz If the release team would be prepared to accept fixes for the above into wheezy, I'll do a -3 upload to unstable fixing them all. Please only unblock -2 if you are happy to fix the Uploaders issue *but not* any of the above. FINALLY! I could also fix out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.1 (current is 3.9.3) at the same time, which is almost certainly only a documentation fix too, but for some reason I'd be more hesitant to do that. Thank you in advance. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121106215338.ga5...@ubik.ncl.ac.uk
Re: Bug#692327: libotr: Please provide libotr2
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:17:05PM +0100, Thibaut VARENE wrote: Noted. The package was in experimental for several weeks and got zero attention. My general understanding is that nobody looks at experimental anyway. I have a lot of sympathy with this point, personally. OTOH I've just made an upload to unstable for a package I wish to have a freeze exception that I would never have predicted I'd need one for. You just can't guess. Another part of the issue was upstream's will to have it in Ubuntu as soon as possible. Ubuntu autosync doesn't fetch from experimental. No sympathy here. That's Ubuntu's problem! Let's not knack our distro for the sake of another. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121106220244.GB25026@debian
Re: Bug#692327: libotr: Please provide libotr2
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 01:43:58PM +, Neil Williams wrote: Hopefully because people are working on the release so that uploads to unstable can be opened again. The quicker we release Wheezy, the quicker this and other packages get into unstable. It's much better to work on RC bugs than to worry about a migration which can't really start until after the freeze. Assuming the people concerned have the time, hardware or skills to fix the remaining RC bugs. Let's not lambast people for putting effort into wheezy+1 if it's that or nothing, rather than that or wheezy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121106220417.GC25026@debian
Re: Candidates for removal from testing (results)
Great stuff, thanks! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121026160652.GC20294@debian
Re: Possible release note for systems running PHP through CGI.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:58:42AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: But if anyone would lobby that (release goal: default to CGI/FCGI), they'd have definitely my support :) A bit late for wheezy, do you mean for +1? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120820130646.GA28685@debian
Bug#682746: unblock: deutex/4.4.902-13
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
thanks
Please unblock package deutex.
Version 4.4.902-13 resolves an RC bug #682132 relating to
Recommends: on a package not in main.
Debdiff attached.
Thanks!
diff -u deutex-4.4.902/debian/changelog deutex-4.4.902/debian/changelog
--- deutex-4.4.902/debian/changelog
+++ deutex-4.4.902/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+deutex (4.4.902-13) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Recommend either boom-wad or doom-wad, since the latter is
+not satisfyable in main. Closes: #682132.
+
+ -- Jon Dowland j...@debian.org Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:08:20 +0100
+
deutex (4.4.902-12) unstable; urgency=low
* Update control file to reflect new VCS location
diff -u deutex-4.4.902/debian/control deutex-4.4.902/debian/control
--- deutex-4.4.902/debian/control
+++ deutex-4.4.902/debian/control
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
Suggests: doom-engine
Provides: doom-wad-editor
-Recommends: doom-wad
+Recommends: boom-wad | doom-wad
Description: composition tool for doom-style WAD files
DEU's Texture Companion (DeuTex) is a resource editor that
can extract and insert graphics, sounds, levels and other
Bug#606820: unblock: sdl-mixer1.2/1.2.8-6.3
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package sdl-mixer1.2 This NMU contains a backported fix for a lock-up bug, #605504. Many thanks. unblock sdl-mixer1.2/1.2.8-6.3 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.36-rc5-686 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: release team advice: chocolate-doom lock-up / OOD libsdl-mixer
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:17:48PM +, Jon Dowland wrote: Chocolate doom (contrib) upstream has alerted me to an RC bug http://bugs.debian.org/605504. The problem is actually in libsdl-mixer1.2 and is fixed upstream. There are three possible ways to resolve this for squeeze (asides from ignoring it): snip 3. backport the fix for sdl-mixer to the current version. I've taken a wild guess that this would be the preferred solution. I uploaded an updated sdl-mixer1.2 package to experimental earlier on. I will re-upload to unstable in 1 or 2 days, if nobody shouts. -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
release team advice: chocolate-doom lock-up / OOD libsdl-mixer
Hi folks, Chocolate doom (contrib) upstream has alerted me to an RC bug http://bugs.debian.org/605504. The problem is actually in libsdl-mixer1.2 and is fixed upstream. There are three possible ways to resolve this for squeeze (asides from ignoring it): 1. backport a workaround for chocolate-doom (this patch: http://chocolate-doom.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/chocolate-doom?view=revisionrevision=2165 which fixes the lock-up at the expense of 'choppy' sound. I think this is the least satisfactory solution, but it is something I am comfortable handling myself. 2. package up a newer version of sdl-mixer. Someone else has done so, and I am working on reconciling their work with the existing packaging (e.g. they dropped debian/patches/* entirely). This should happen for squeeze+n n=1 anyway, but a freeze exception could be requested. At present I have no idea what the implications would be on linking packages: binnmus, etc. I have a membership request pending for the SDL maintainers alioth team and am prepared to NMU when I am satisfied with a package, subject to any squeeze decision. There hasn't been any feedback from the team regarding the new package efforts. 3. backport the fix for sdl-mixer to the current version. The chocolate-doom bug lists an hg commit upstream which apparently fixes the issue. I do not know (yet) how easily this would apply to current sdl-mixer nor what implications this would have on linking packages. My next step personally is to try to answer my own questions in 2. or 3., but any steer from you folks would be very welcome. Many thanks, -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101130221748.ga10...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: Squeeze Artwork: selection of default theme
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:01:39AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: I'm not sure the size is relevant for the freeze exception (though it might be for inclusion in the first CD), but in any case if the release team thinks it's a bad idea, it can be changed. The release time might take issue, because instead of asking for a freeze exception in order to change the look and feel of the default desktops, we'd be asking for a freeze exception to do that, and also package up three non-default themes, which is an entirely different thing. In the mean time, I think it's a bad idea, because it forces all desktop users to install nearly half a dozen themes. I think we really have to step back and acknowledge that we *are* in freeze, we should take the freeze rules seriously, squeeze should be released as soon as possible, and these themes will be available in the next release (and in squeeze via backports). We can remove the previous artwork (at least Etch one) too to gain size, though that means dealing with the alternatives removal. Because we can't package the existing theme in a new package for squeeze, this would mean that anyone upgrading to squeeze who has chosen to have the old theme will have it ripped away from underneath them. So I think we have to leave the old theme in for squeeze, and move it into an external package for squeeze+1 (or drop it, if nobody wants to maintain it). -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2010132754.gb31...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: advice requested: requesting an unblock request for bup
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 13/10/10 06:38, Adam D. Barratt wrote: I think there may have been a small misunderstanding there. :-) You said that upgrading to 0.17 would make the size of repositories increase in size, and I was wondering how big that increase was. Ah yes, good question. I was going on the following para in [1]: For anyone who hasn't been paying attention, I checked in some patches to replace bup's checksum algorithm a while back; this is the first release with that change. Warning: this moves all the split points when bup splits large files, so your backup sets will experience a surprise increase in size for the first backup after you upgrade to this version. Sorry, but that's why we don't call it 1.0 yet! [1] http://groups.google.com/group/bup-list/browse_thread/thread/5e2ccdd137d05e43/c683010bcff90d91?lnk=gstq=0.17#c683010bcff90d91 I just performed a test, backing up 100M of urandom via bup 0.14a-2, then performing a second backup using current upstream git HEAD. And... I got no increase in the backup dir whatsoever. Admittedly if there aren't many users of the old version then it may not be a particular issue in practice. Despite not having proved anything substantial, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of this mythical bump hitting people after 2 years of backing up with 0.14-2 (worst-case scenario). - -- Jon Dowland -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAky8v74ACgkQFotOcXAy8jiprwCeMxaNsFDJH7JXKWKXnc8yTRl6 k0YAn0eqSq2uepzoU/YGtJUsaelEePr6 =IzPY -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cbcbfbe.8040...@debian.org
Re: Debian squeeze theme: dead in the water?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi -release, I'll be aiming any further discussion at -desktop only after this message. Thanks! But first, I do have a release-specific question. desktop-base contains the current default Debian lookfeel. It strikes me that a theme could (or even should) perhaps exist as a package in order to get exposure before being blessed as a default theme. Therefore, for the three themes that are being considered (and presently are not in the archive in any form), I think it would be most ideal if they were independently packaged, uploaded, and then, should one be chosen as the default LF, desktop-base adjusted to Depends: on it. Future workflow might have a theme in the archive earlier in the cycle. But that means 3 NEW package uploads and a request for unblock on the blessed one at least (and that looks like Ciel). Would that be frowned upon? On 11/10/10 06:56, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: On mar., 2010-10-12 at 01:12 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: When testing d-i images for squeeze, I noticed that the look and feel of grub, gnome etc. are the debblue theme that first came in (iirc) Etch. You don't recall correctly. Etch had MoreBlue theme (see http://www.debianart.org/cchost/?ccm=/media/files/si0ux/334 for a slightly updated version). Lenny has MoreBlue Orbit, see http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktopArtworkLenny. None have a DebBlue theme. Thanks for the clarification. Looking at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt , it would appear there was some effort to come up with a novel look-and-feel for Squeeze. But that effort seems to have died pre-freeze. Am I right? No. See http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktopArtworkSqueeze and http://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt/Themes I did before posting, and saw no activity for four months. I'm glad to see I've kicked the hornets nest :) - -- Jon Dowland -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAky8vfYACgkQFotOcXAy8jicoQCfe1dg/rZfD1d44gPhcq2ZOYoq ys4An1Z7pqbF03nPDc9gZSRCmQoFaO0w =4wB6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cbcbdf6.2020...@debian.org
Re: advice requested: requesting an unblock request for bup
I'm sorry for the long delay in responding. On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:36:52PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: How big is that jump? If we unblock the new version, are we going to get lots of 0.14a users complaining about it? :) 0.14a to 0.17 is 82 files changed, 9179 insertions(+), 888 deletions(-) 0.14a to 0.17 with tornado excised is 59 files changed, 1689 insertions(+), 888 deletions(-) So err, pretty big. I don't think there are many/any 0.14a users. popcon reports something like 66 total bup users, and that is for 0.14a-2 and 0.17b-2. b) repackage 0.17 with the 'bup web' stuff excised, removing the tornado dependency (and web feature) [...] 88 files changed, 9452 insertions(+), 989 deletions(-) I assume this is basically the removal of cmd/web-cmd.py and lib/tornado/ ? removing tornado from 0.17 is 24 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 7491 deletions(-) I can't remember what the original diffstat I posted was calculated from. A diff -ruN ... | diffstat between debian/0.14a-2 and debian/0.17b-2 (testing, unstable): 63 files changed, 2100 insertions(+), 953 deletions(-) Note that unstable at present depends on external libpython-tornado, so cmd-web.py is still in there (but tornado is not). -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101012210645.ga25...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: Bug#596130: unblock: doom-wad-shareware/1.9.fixed-1
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 06:15:01PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 17:02:43 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 09:15:50PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 21:01:58 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: Please unblock package doom-wad-shareware. You're getting rid of the md5sums control file? Thanks for spotting. That is not intentional. Would you prefer it fixed for squeeze? If it's not too much trouble :) I've uploaded a fixed package version 1.9.fixed-2. Thanks, -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100913135447.ga15...@deckard.alcopop.org
Bug#596744: RM: debgtd/1.3.1-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Hi - please remove debgtd from testing. As the maintainer, I do not feel that the package as it currently stands is particularly useful, or suitable for a stable release. Many thanks -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100913195101.ga11...@tchicaya.lan
Re: Bug#596130: unblock: doom-wad-shareware/1.9.fixed-1
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 09:15:50PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 21:01:58 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: Please unblock package doom-wad-shareware. You're getting rid of the md5sums control file? Thanks for spotting. That is not intentional. Would you prefer it fixed for squeeze? -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100912160243.ga...@deckard.alcopop.org
advice requested: requesting an unblock request for bup
Hello, bup in testing is 0.14a. Version 0.17 introduced some changes to the checksum algorithm. Anyone with a bup repository created pre 0.17 will have their backup repository jump in size when they eventually move to 0.17 (or later). I would like to help people avoid that, especially stable users (i.e., it seems unfair for a Debian user a year from now to discover bup and be hit with the increase on upgrade, despite the problem having been solved now). bup 0.17 and later added a feature 'bup web' which depended on the python tornado library. Bup embeds a particular copy of that library, but works with external versions = 1.0.1. python-tornado in testing is 0.2, and you have not granted a freeze exception for 1.0.1-1. (and the python team are likely to request removal of 0.2 from testing, since nobody should use it!) Thus, I have the following options a) leave 0.14a in and let stable users hit the bump when they move to wheezy b) repackage 0.17 with the 'bup web' stuff excised, removing the tornado dependency (and web feature) c) do not include bup in the next stable release of Debian d) backport the checksum changes to 0.14a I think c) would be a shame. If I were to do b), the diff would be 88 files changed, 9452 insertions(+), 989 deletions(-) Would this be totally unacceptable for an unblock? bear in mind bup is a leaf node, and new to Debian since lenny. I'm not sure I can achieve d) (or if I did, how much smaller the diff would be versus c)), and I'd be concerned about having such a unique version of bup in Debian vs the rest of the world. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100909184657.gc16...@deckard.alcopop.org
Bug#596130: unblock: doom-wad-shareware/1.9.fixed-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hello, Please unblock package doom-wad-shareware. This is possibly the simplest possible Debian package: it installs precicely one upstream file, plus the changelog and copyright files. Amazingly, it turns out it has been installing the wrong upstream file for the last ten years. The original maintainer resigned in December last year. I've taken over maintenance and packaged the correct file. Due to the trivial nature of the package, the fact that the testing version installs the wrong file, and to prevent the former maintainer being bugged about the package for the duration of the next release, I am requesting this unblock. unblock doom-wad-shareware/1.9.fixed-1 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.30-2-686 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Freeze exception for the python-tornado package
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 10:07:04PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: It would allow the bup package to get rid of a embedded python-tornado library and to depend on the new python-tornado package, which is a cleaner situation. It is my intention (bup maintainer - hello!) to request a freeze exception to bup, pending decision on this one. There will be a painful change to backup format between bup-in-testing as it stands, and present day bup, which I want to prevent exposing Debian users to. I haven't yet decided whether to request removal of the current version of bup from testing yet. Note that neither python-tornado nor bup existed in lenny. It's also quite a large debdiff for a package which has only ever had one other upload: 141 files changed, 1969 insertions(+), 37871 deletions(-) 0.2 - 1.0.1 seems a large jump to be making during freeze. :-/ I asked debian-python whether they would be requesting a freeze exception for python-tornado, and was told that this freeze exception was going to be requested: http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2010/09/msg8.html Additionally, quoting Piotr: If they will not accept it, we'll most probably ask to remove python-tornado from Squeeze -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100908212650.gc31...@deckard.alcopop.org
Bug#595377: RM: archfs/0.5.4-2
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Hello, I am the maintainer of archfs. I believe that #552228 should preclude archfs from inclusion in a stable release. Can you please remove the version in testing? Many thanks -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.30-2-686 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100903145813.ga12...@tchicaya.lan
Re: new freedoom packages for stable and oldstable to fix copyvio
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 09:53:02AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: oldstable: http://debian.halfcoded.net/source/freedoom_0.5+dfsg1-1.dsc There seems to be some graphic corruption in this one that I forgot about. The lenny package seems fine though. I've removed this one until I figure out what has gone wrong. Strange. I've fixed this: when built with pbuilder, I got corruption; when I setup a etch chroot with debootstrap the result is fine... -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: new freedoom packages for stable and oldstable to fix copyvio
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 06:56:50PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: I am preparing packages suitable for oldstable and stable now. I will reply with interdiffs once I have prepared them. Etch attached. Essentially the same as lenny. diff -u freedoom-0.5/debian/changelog freedoom-0.5+dfsg1/debian/changelog --- freedoom-0.5/debian/changelog +++ freedoom-0.5+dfsg1/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +freedoom (0.5+dfsg1-1) oldstable; urgency=medium + + * redact copyright-violating material. Fixes: #533135. + + -- Jon Dowland j...@alcopop.org Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:23:31 +0100 + freedoom (0.5-1) unstable; urgency=low [ Jon Dowland ] diff -u freedoom-0.5/debian/copyright freedoom-0.5+dfsg1/debian/copyright --- freedoom-0.5/debian/copyright +++ freedoom-0.5+dfsg1/debian/copyright @@ -40,0 +41,18 @@ + + + +This version of freedoom has been modified from the original in order +to remove material that has subsequently been identified as violating +copyright. + +At the time of writing , the notice of +copyright violation was posted at +http://www.doomworld.com/vb/freedoom/46675-musical-plagiarism-in-freedoom/ + +The affected files were anything under ./musics/metabolist within the source. + +Simply removing this directory is sufficient to convert the upstream source +tarball to be DFSG-compatible. No further modifications are necessary +to build the package. + +-- Jon Dowland j...@alcopop.org, Fri Jun 19 19:23:00 BST 2009 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: new freedoom packages for stable and oldstable to fix copyvio
I have uploaded the new packages to a temporary repository at http://debian.halfcoded.net/: oldstable: http://debian.halfcoded.net/source/freedoom_0.5+dfsg1-1.dsc stable: http://debian.halfcoded.net/source/freedoom_0.6.2+dfsg1-1.dsc Please let me know if they are OK for uploading to the archive. -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please unblock game-data-packager
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 07:50:45PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Does this mean that doom-package is supposed to be replaced by game-data-packager? If so please file a removal bug for the former and I'll unblock the latter :-) Yup that's right: done (and actioned by ftpmaster in under 10 minutes!): http://bugs.debian.org/494318 Is a separate removal request required for testing in freeze, or will it just drop out naturally? Thanks, -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
please unblock game-data-packager
Hi folks, I gave a heads-up about this a week or so ago[1]. Please unblock game-data-packager version 18 for entry into Lenny (well, contrib-alongside-lenny). The reason for the delay was primarily navigating NEW, which was necessary only due to a name change (it's not really a NEW package but an evolution of doom-package) but I have also subsequently (yesterday) added a Provides: line to properly migrate users from the older doom-package across to game-data-packager. This completes various transitions in the doom packages to give a consistent dooming experience in Debian. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/07/msg00707.html Many thanks, -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
(future) freeze exception requested: game-data-packager
Hi folks, This is just a heads up. game-data-packager is a contrib package with no reverse dependencies[1]. The package is a newer version of doom-package in Etch. I renamed it shortly after Etch's release as we intended to implement support for various other games (e.g. quake2, quake3). However, that work has not been completed for Lenny. Due to the rename, game-data-packager is currently in the NEW queue. However, it is essentially an incremental upgrade on doom-package. The late upload was due to a last minute backing out of code which dependend on gdebi, which imho is not stable enough for what we intended to use it for. Once it escapes the NEW queue, I would like to request a freeze exception for it. The package completes two separate transitions for the doom packages in Lenny: * the .deb files that game-data-packager generates include .desktop files that invoke the game. the doom engine package (prboom) dropped it's .desktop file. Doom players now rely on the data packages to provide them. The .debs generated by the existing doom-package will not suffice. * the generated .deb files provides the virtual package boom-wad, which was introduced post-Etch to clear the path for chocolate-doom to (eventually) be packaged, in Lenny+1 The prboom packages references game-data-packager in several places; so if someone raised an objection to including this package and it could not be let into Lenny, I would have to prepare a prboom package that removed these references and request an exception for that. Although I hope that does not happen :) I shall post to the list again once g-d-p escapes NEW. [1] prboom Suggests: it. Thank you, -- Jon Dowland http://jmtd.net/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Removing quake2-data from etch
Jamie Wilkinson wrote: This one time, at band camp, Andreas Metzler wrote: On a sidenote: Jamie, how about orphaning quake2-data and quake, afaict you have not been maintaining it actively for a couple of years. I see no harm in the current state. I've only recently begun to have enough time to manage packages again in the last 4 years, so hopefully this will see improvement. I have no objection to others maintaining these packages through NMUs, however, and thus I see no reason to orphan them. Would you consider joining and co-maintaining these packages as part of the Debian games team (list CCed and FU'd)? There is a lot of potential cross-pollination that can occur there with these packages, particularly -data (as we are working on combined, generic data installer packages for such things). -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please allow wallpaper-tray/0.4.6-5 into Etch
Hello there, I have prepared wallpaper-tray 0.4.6-5 which is now in unstable in order to squash two important bugs for Etch. The diffstat output might scare you: 12 files changed, 4658 insertions(+), 3338 deletions(-) however, virtually all of this is regenerated ./configure, ./configure.in and ./config.h.in as a result of a one-line change to ./configure.ac to fix RC bug #382784. The other changes are very small indeed. Excluding the aformentioned regenerations and ./debian: 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) These are trivial fixes for important bug #375168 and housekeeping #404231. Please allow wallpaper-tray 0.4.6-5 into Etch. -- Jon Dowland signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please allow prboom 2:2.4.6+dfsg-1 into testing
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 11:29:57AM +, Jon Dowland wrote: Please allow this package into testing. This migrated on saturday: whoever unblocked it, thanks! -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please allow prboom 2:2.4.6+dfsg-1 into testing
Hi there, I've prepared a prboom 2:2.4.6+dfsg-1 package which has been uploaded to unstable (thanks Moritz Muehlenhoff). This fixes RC bug #404826 (non-free material in main): prboom (2:2.4.6+dfsg-1) unstable; urgency=high . * Remove ID-copyright material from prboom.wad Closes: #404826 The change consists of a repackaged orig tarball. Some resources have been removed entirely and the ./configure line in debian/rules adjusted to disable a feature which relied apon them (specifically, --disable-dogs). These resources are detailed in comments in ./data/prboom.txt within the tarball. Other resources have been replaced with free alternatives. These are detailed in a text file ./debian/bad_menu_lumps.txt . Both modifications are detailed in the copyright file. Please allow this package into testing. Yours, -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
