Re: Archive support for *.orig.bundle.* and *.debian.bundle.*
On Sun, 2024-06-16 at 20:40 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Do we delete all our old snapshots from snapshot.d.o if/when > infringing or non-Free content is detected in a package? > AFAIK: no we don't. Access to packages on snapshot.d.o has been blocked several times in the past due to issues with distributabiity - see #763613 for example. Regards, Adam
Re: [RFC] General Resolution to deploy tag2upload
On Wed, 2024-06-12 at 10:43 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > There was more confusion about this point than I had anticipated, so > I want to emphasize that the dgit-repos server is not a forge, is not > a competitor to Salsa, doesn't replace Salsa in any way, and is not > something that people interact with the way that they interact with > Salsa. > It's much closer to a Git equivalent of archive.debian.org: a > persistent historical record accessible via the Git protocol and (as > I discovered during this thread) a cgit web interface. In that sense, it's more like snapshot.debian.org, I think? archive.d.o stores historical releases of Debian as a whole, not individual uploads that happen between stable releases. (With perfect hindsight, "archive" is a horribly overloaded word in Debian terms, but...) Regards, Adam
Re: Q: NEW process licence requirements
On Sat, 2018-03-31 at 15:37 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > The ftp team is granted powers over the work of all people in Debian > directly from the DPL, To be slightly picky here, and possibly veering a little off the topic, the FTP Masters are delegated. Any powers that the remainder of the team have only exist in so far as the FTP Masters extend them. (My understanding is that unlike, for instance, the Release Team, the FTP Team still has technical restrictions in place which affect what members of the team can do - e.g. only FTP Masters can deploy changes to dak or the projectb database.) Regards, Adam
Re: Slight confusion with voting
On Sun, 2016-07-31 at 15:42 +0530, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > Hello there, > > [Please Cc me on reply not subscribed to debian-vote] > > I'm voting for the first time and received the ballot but I'm confused > with following paragraph in ballot > > > The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created > > for this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project > > secretary, is appended below. > > So do I need to sign the vote with my key or the key appended in the > mail or both?.. Your key. "Responses to a valid vote" come from the secretary, after you cast such a vote; you are responding to a ballot, not a vote. Regards, Adam
Re: Plan B for kfreebsd
On 2014-11-10 7:05, Andrew McGlashan wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Steven, On 10/11/2014 10:15 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: We discussed kfreebsd at length, but are not satisfied that a release with Jessie will be of sufficient quality. We are dropping it as an official release architecture, Thank you for all your enthusiasm and support of kFreeBSD. [...] So sad that Debian is no longer going to be the universal Linux and that kFreeBSD is to suffer the consequences of the ... at best, controversial, systemd decision by the TC ... :( This really shouldn't need stating, but as people appear to be unable to separate issues and insist on dragging everything down to the same level - the Release Team decision on kFreeBSD was based on our opinion of the current status and supportability of that architecture, not a belief that Linux is somehow superior, nor any opinion on the merits of particular init systems, nor the phase of the moon. I'd appreciate an apology for having our motives impugned and this unfortunate situation used as yet another stick in an unrelated "dispute", but I won't be holding my breath. Unhappily, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2746ccc44ef81d2d7fefd5310fd14...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Legitimate exercise of our constitutional decision-making processes [Was, Re: Tentative summary of the amendments]
On 2014-10-30 9:43, Matthias Urlichs wrote: Hi, Florian Lohoff: There are tons of people who think that all the above functionality does not belong to a init systemd or ecosystem. There are also tons of people who could care less, as long as it gets the job done. fwiw, as this seems to be a commonish error - you mean "could not care less". People who could care less by definition do care. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/306a72a7e149b07b8122b4366421e...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Legitimate exercise of our constitutional decision-making processes [Was, Re: Tentative summary of the amendments]
On 2014-10-29 16:13, Ian Jackson wrote:
Marco d'Itri writes ("Re: Legitimate exercise of our constitutional
decision-making processes [Was, Re: Tentative summary of the
amendments]"):
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
>I don't want to be having this conversation again in a year's time,
And still, I am ready to bet that we will...
If my GR passes we will only have to have this conversation if those
who are outvoted do not respect the project's collective decision.
If my GR fails I expect a series of bitter rearguard battles over
individual systemd dependencies.
Please, let's be fair. If the GR fails, we will only have to have this
conversation if those who are outvoted do not respect the project's
collective decision.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/13915ce5f940324ac2b3285d1c99e...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 13:15 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > The TC stated, and passed a resolution to the effect of Debian > continuing to support multiple init systems. If, as you say, "Gnome > right now is installable with systemd-shim + sysvinit," those sound > like release critical bugs in Gnome and/or systemd-shim - and precisely > a reason to resolve this issue now, not kick it down the road. I think you may be confused about what Holger wrote. You appear to be arguing that *things working* is a release critical bug. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413568133.2260.27.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
On 2014-10-17 12:00, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: On 17 October 2014 13:27, Matthias Urlichs wrote: If it passes (which I consider to be sufficiently unlikely to wonder why the *censored* Ian even bothered, but whatever), _then_ these lists are the right places to discuss the implications. Until then, let's keep it here. From the discussion so far (and please correct me if I am wrong) the only implication of this passing would be that a failure of init-system-neutrality would now be a serious bug. Note (and this is not splitting hairs) that "serious bug" is not a direct analogue for "release-critical bug". Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cd3d6102a0b50499dc9017549f59d...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
On 2014-10-17 9:45, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: On Thursday 16 October 2014 11:58 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Speaking for no-one other than myself, I _am_ very unhappy that given how long the discussion has been rumbling on for, and how much opportunity there has been, that anyone thought that two weeks before the freeze (which has had a fixed date for nearly a year now) was the right time to raise this. It was not intentional. Ian asked, and I expressed my opinion. That doesn't really disagree with my point. Ian could have asked weeks - in fact _months_ - ago. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5042cd3d170a9cc1e19b9003700b4...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 22:00 +0300, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > We have all kinds of policies about what is fine in a package and what > is a Release Critical bug. That is a big part of what makes a > distribution. This simply adds - "must be able to work with any init > system running at PID 1" to those requirements. Strictly speaking, "what is a Release Critical bug" is the release team's purview, as per their delegation. (Of course, subject to being overriden by the project as with any other delegate.) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413486565.2260.15.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 19:01 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
> init systems"):
> > I've sympathy for the motives behind this GR, but discovering that those
> > teams might have their Jessie plans disrupted---on a very short
> > notice---by this GR will make me think twice or thrice before helping in
> > making it happen.
>
> I think that if necessary we might have to delay the release. That
> would be a matter for the release team. I would be very unhappy if we
> ditched the ability of people to choose a different init system simply
> to maintain our release schedule.
Speaking for no-one other than myself, I _am_ very unhappy that given
how long the discussion has been rumbling on for, and how much
opportunity there has been, that anyone thought that two weeks before
the freeze (which has had a fixed date for nearly a year now) was the
right time to raise this.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413484103.2260.10.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: leader2013
On Sat, 2013-04-13 at 13:52 +0300, vangelis mouhtsis wrote: > i tryed to vote but failed. is the vote only for Debian project > members? Yes. Reading the mail should have made this quite clear. NOTE: The vote must be GPG signed (or PGP signed) with your key that is in the Debian keyring. The mail also refers to the constitution, where one will find: 1. The Project Leader is elected by the Developers. [...] 5. The next two weeks are the polling period during which Developers may cast their votes. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1365850842.4627.20.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [all candidates] Removing or limiting DD rights?
On 03.04.2013 06:09, Chris Knadle wrote: On Tuesday, April 02, 2013 20:34:28, Russ Allbery wrote: Note that we already did do something about it by deprecating close in the BTS in favor of sending a real email message to -done that is copied to the submitter. The Debian BTS now nags the maintainer about telling the submitter something if they use the close command. That's interesting. That sounds like an improvement in this area. If you happen to know when that was implemented, I'd be interested. June of last year I saw a bug closed (marked as done, without explanation) where I didn't see any email sent to the BTS control@ address in the bug, so I was confused as to how the bug was closed. Would emailing -done do that? Closing the bug is exactly what -done is for. Using control@ to close bugs should be the exception, not the rule. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/93853dd7c74239d3941ce5762...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 15:27 +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > > Heck, before m68k was dropped as a factor in package propagation into > > testing, I was routinely finding bogus dep-waits set by the m68k buildd > > maintainers themselves, and that's only about a half-dozen people. > > I can name you the reasons why I don't have much of a clue about this (I > think): [...] > - it's not easy to see what's going on there, and why. For example, I > don't know where I can read what dep-wait means and why and how a > package is put in this state. [...] > Of course it's difficult to change that. Someone should write a nice > page about it, and "someone" is, as usual, a synonym for "not me". Someone already did, at least for the buildd side - http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd/ (with specific reference to http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd/wanna-build-states). It's linked from http://www.debian.org/devel/, under "Projects", "Autobuilder network". There's also, e.g., http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/ but I'm not sure if that's directly linked from anywhere. Adam
Re: GFDL GR: Amendment: invariant-less in main v2
"Wouter Verhelst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:08 AM > On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 06:26:27AM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: [...] >> For this reason, we encourage documentation authors to license >> their works (or dual-license, together with the GFDL) under the >> same terms as the software they refer to, or any of the traditional > shouldn't this line end like "or _under_ any of the traditional"? >> free software licenses like the the GPL or the BSD license. Nope, the lack of a second "under" is fine (in en_GB, at least). The use of license as both a noun and a verb, otoh, is an en_USism. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2005
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 21:48 +0100, Nico Golde wrote: > Hi, > * Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-02-28 21:36]: > > The nomination period is at an end, with six candidates > > standing forth to be counted. We are now in the campaigning period. > > The candidates are: > > > > o Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ^^ Is the email address wrong? No, as a quick lookup at http://db.debian.org/ will show. > There is no entry for http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Indeed, because Matthew doesn't use his debian.org address as the maintainer address for his packages. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
