Hello Roger,
Roger Shimizu:
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> Is it time to upload backports of 0.2.7-3 to stretch?
> I'm also wondering why it didn't hit testing yet.
I agree with you and will take care of it this month.
Cheers!
u.
Hi Roger,
Not the maintainer here, but:
On 17-08-31 20:10:35, Roger Shimizu wrote:
> Is it time to upload backports of 0.2.7-3 to stretch?
No: Packages need to be first in testing, before going into -backports.
> I'm also wondering why it didn't hit testing yet.
Read this bug report for some
Dear Maintainer,
Is it time to upload backports of 0.2.7-3 to stretch?
I'm also wondering why it didn't hit testing yet.
Cheers,
--
Roger Shimizu, GMT +9 Tokyo
PGP/GPG: 4096R/6C6ACD6417B3ACB1
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 03:06:48PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 09:13:59AM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
> > > So of course what I shall do is to disable those mails to me, after all
> > > I'm one of the maintainers of jenkins.d.n :) But then I fear that
> > >
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 09:13:59AM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
> > So of course what I shall do is to disable those mails to me, after all
> > I'm one of the maintainers of jenkins.d.n :) But then I fear that
> > torbrowser-launcher will bitrot even more…
> Perhaps Ulrike would want to be the
Hi,
Holger Levsen:
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:12:39PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
>> Fundamentally, do you disagree with the main point this bug report is
>> about i.e. "Should not be part of Stretch"?
> yes, somewhat, but I acknowledge that it's not my call.
>> And if you indeed do want to see
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:12:39PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
> While I see a few interesting related points and questions in your
> message, I still don't understand what is your position wrt.
> what's most relevant here IMO, so I figured I would ask you instead of
> arguing based on wrong
Hi Holger,
[This comes after reading your message, feeling unhappy about it,
sleeping on it and re-reading it again.]
While I see a few interesting related points and questions in your
message, I still don't understand what is your position wrt.
what's most relevant here IMO, so I figured I
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:27:00PM +, u wrote:
> Currently, the design of the software makes the package very often
> unusable, as soon as TorBrowser upstream gets signed with a different
> OpenPGP key or the SSL certificate of the server changes. This is not
> reliable and normal users will
Package: torbrowser-launcher
Severity: serious
I'm opening this RC bug in order to prevent torbrowser-launcher from
migrating to testing.
Currently, the design of the software makes the package very often
unusable, as soon as TorBrowser upstream gets signed with a different
OpenPGP key or the
10 matches
Mail list logo
