Next Meeting -- 13th October at 6pm UTC

2021-10-13 Thread Sean Whitton
Dear Technical Committee members, Our monthly meeting is scheduled to take place Wednesday at 6pm UTC. I am unlikely to be able to look into Jitsi before then as I have a busy start to the week. Unless someone else would like to do that, let's IRC this time. Proposed agenda: * Review of previo

Next Meeting -- 13th October at 6pm UTC

2021-10-13 Thread Sean Whitton
Dear Technical Committee members, Our monthly meeting is scheduled to take place Wednesday at 6pm UTC. I am unlikely to be able to look into Jitsi before then as I have a busy start to the week. Unless someone else would like to do that, let's IRC this time. Proposed agenda: * Review of previo

Bug#994388: tech-ctte: More specific advice regarding merged-/usr and implications of #978636

2021-10-13 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello Simon, On Tue 05 Oct 2021 at 07:48PM +01, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sun, 03 Oct 2021 at 16:52:15 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: >> On Mon 27 Sep 2021 at 10:59AM +01, Simon McVittie wrote: >> > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 at 15:35:11 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: >> >> (1) The reason for this, to put it a

Bug#994388: tech-ctte: More specific advice regarding merged-/usr and implications of #978636

2021-10-13 Thread Simon McVittie
I'm calling for votes on the following resolution as formal advice from the Technical Committee (Constitution §6.1.5). There are no non-accepted amendments, so the options to vote on are "yes" or "further discussion". begin text to be voted on Summary === There are currently Debian

Bug#994388: tech-ctte: More specific advice regarding merged-/usr and implications of #978636

2021-10-13 Thread Simon McVittie
On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 at 20:13:08 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > I'm calling for votes on the following resolution as formal advice from > the Technical Committee (Constitution §6.1.5). There are no non-accepted > amendments, so the options to vote on are "yes" or "further discussion". I vote yes >

Bug#994275: Draft resolution for reverting changes in debianutils

2021-10-13 Thread Sean Whitton
Dear all, We think we might have a consensus on the following resolution text. We could be wrong, as the judgement of consensus has been made by just a few of us. We agreed in our meeting today that I'll start a vote a week from today unless a ctte member asks for a delay. Thus, we expect to cl

Bug#994275: Draft resolution for reverting changes in debianutils

2021-10-13 Thread David Bremner
Sean Whitton writes: > 1. Offer advice: >The debianutils package must continue to provide the which(1) program >until a compatible utility is available in a package that is at least >transitively essential in Debian 12. Is it really advice if we say "must"? > 2. Overrule maintainer