On 2023-01-28 20:44:50 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2023-01-28 15:03:04 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:24:47PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > >...
> > > * Those bugs are RC by definition and have been for a long time.
> > >...
> >
> > Please provide a pointer
On 2023-01-28 15:03:04 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:24:47PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >...
> > * Those bugs are RC by definition and have been for a long time.
> >...
>
> Please provide a pointer where a release team member has said so
> explicitly in recent years.
On 2023-01-28 13:59, Adrian Bunk wrote:
I am not saying that trying to force maintainers to spend time on such
issues by making them release critical is better, but you are also
creating extra work and frustration for the people who are doing QA work
in Debian.
It also pushes some maintainers
El 28/1/23 a las 13:59, Adrian Bunk escribió:
Policy 4.2 also says
Source packages should specify which binary packages they require to
be installed or not to be installed in order to build correctly.
We are not following the "not to be installed" part,
which is the can of worms you would
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:24:47PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>...
> * Those bugs are RC by definition and have been for a long time.
>...
Please provide a pointer where a release team member has said so
explicitly in recent years.
In my experience they are usually saying that FTBFS that do
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:20:16AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> El 27/1/23 a las 22:37, Adrian Bunk escribió:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 02:15:13AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
...
> > I am right now looking at #1027382, and the first question is how I can
> > make apt remove e2fsprogs so that I
El 28/1/23 a las 10:11, Vincent Bernat escribió:
On 2023-01-28 00:20, Santiago Vila wrote:
Release Policy exists as a canonical list of what should be RC and > what not,
and it's intended to avoid stupid discussions like this one.
Extending build-essential is easier than asking many people
On 2023-01-28 00:20, Santiago Vila wrote:
Release Policy exists as a canonical list of what should be RC and > what not,
and it's intended to avoid stupid discussions like this one.
Extending build-essential is easier than asking many people to do
pointless work to satisfy a set of
El 27/1/23 a las 22:37, Adrian Bunk escribió:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 02:15:13AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
Greetings.
I'm doing archive-wide rebuilds again.
I've just filed 21 bugs with subject "Missing build-depends on tzdata"
in bookworm (as tzdata is not build-essential).
This is of
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 02:15:13AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I'm doing archive-wide rebuilds again.
>
> I've just filed 21 bugs with subject "Missing build-depends on tzdata"
> in bookworm (as tzdata is not build-essential).
>
> This is of course not fun for the maintainers,
10 matches
Mail list logo
