On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 02:43:50PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 10:24:28AM +0100, Xavier Lüthi wrote:
As apt-proxy do not have anymore any active developper but only some
package maintainers, and taking into account the number of bugs filed
for apt-proxy, I think
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 03:45:51PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Two more months have passed after this ping, without any reaction. I'm
hence going to file a removal RoQA request for apt-proxy. The idea of
the transitional package is not in contrast with that action, it can
simply be added
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 04:24:29PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Here we go: #460338.
Err, rather: #576821.
Sorry: cut and paste error.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 10:24:28AM +0100, Xavier Lüthi wrote:
Francesco P. Lovergine fran...@debian.org a écrit :
severity 460338 grave
I agree to raise the severity of this bug as it renders the package
unusable.
snip
In the past month, I've tried to have apt-proxy's package in a better
Hi,
Le Wed, 27 Jan 2010 22:43:31 +0100,
Francesco P. Lovergine fran...@debian.org a écrit :
severity 460338 grave
thanks
I agree to raise the severity of this bug as it renders the package
unusable.
I finally removed today apt-proxy in my work LAN because this hanging
onto update is a
5 matches
Mail list logo
