On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 08:49:05PM +0100, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Le Saturday 01 March 2008 19:48:50 Christian Perrier, vous avez écrit :
> > If someone cares to listen: when you think about ITPing each and every
> > piece of FLOSS that pops around: think about *help
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
> On Fri February 29 2008 09:26:32 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
> > > I'm not a DD but I've been programming since 1963 when I was 7.
> > > Based on decades of software engineering experience, I would
> > > just l
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any reason why a Debian should spend resources to maintain
> things that are not good enough for Debian?
Debian isn't being asked to do any such thing. I've been thinking
about doing this for a long time, one of
Thank you for your feedback...
Alle 21:41, sab 1 marzo 2008, Don Armstrong ha scritto:
> > If nothing against comes up, I'm going to use such usertags as
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and report (lots of) RFPs (and possibly some ITP!)
> > for fields I am interested in.
>
> I'd suggest just picking a rea
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 09:30:16PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ben Finney:
> > It's no security risk to unpack a tarball, apply a patch to it via GNU
> > 'patch', and examine the result.
>
> History should tell you that this is not true. 8-) I can even understand
> people who state that GNU t
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:32:29AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:10:32PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:30:55PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > >man-db really does have some special-casing here. Trust me. It was
> > >necessary at the time. Th
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 18:57:47 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Now, unless we decide to, Debian is not meant to refuse any *new* package.
Sure it is.
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2008-03-01, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ask:
> - Who is in charge for taking such a decision ?
Release team
> - Where can I appeal ?
Tech-ctte
/Sune
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Le Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:15:17PM +0100, Julien BLACHE a écrit :
> Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> He doesn't have to use unstable. He can use pinning for this specific
> package.
Sure, and he can also use dpkg -i. The question is: why should we ask
him to make the effort?
For
Hi,
For people who are trying to figure out what my merging and
branching workflow looks like, I have uploaded a recent picture for
fvwm at:
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/fvwm.png
I should warn you that this is a large image; and is known to
crash iceweasel. I suggest
Michael Biebl wrote:
Matteo Vescovi wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soothsayer
Hi Matteo,
please see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/01/msg00368.html
In short: You only file *one* ITP for the source pac
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:10:32PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:30:55PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:21:41PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >man-db really does have some special-casing here. Trust me. It was
> >necessary at the time. There a
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 05:41:25AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > Package descriptions should stick to positive aspects of the package,
> > > and not try to draw comparisons towards other packages. IMO.
> > A package description is intended for the administrator to choose which of
> > a set o
On 11311 March 1977, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Hey, reading you I figured out that all newcomers are required to have
> contributions in Debian, which means *new packages*.
No, it doesn't mean new packages. It means contributions.
--
bye, Joerg
A.D. 1517:
Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008, Luca Brivio wrote:
> Any comments? What ‘user’ should we use?
>
> If nothing against comes up, I'm going to use such usertags as
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and report (lots of) RFPs (and possibly some ITP!) for
> fields I am interested in.
I'd suggest just picking a reasonable s
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 08:49:05PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> I figured out that all newcomers are required to have contributions in
> Debian, which means *new packages*.
Not at all. They must maintain at least one (but preferrably more)
packages (if they want to do packaging). They may be t
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 19:48:50 Christian Perrier, vous avez écrit :
> If someone cares to listen: when you think about ITPing each and every
> piece of FLOSS that pops around: think about *helping* people who
> maintain existing packages instead of adding even more noise to our
> noisy bunch of
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 02:10:36AM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote:
> David Nusinow wrote:
> > What's the difference between this and xsm?
>
> It well-integrated with LXDE and other modern desktop environments, the
> difference between this and xsm are:
> * Removed the session dialog from xsm.
> * Use bet
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libdata-javascript-perl
Version : 1.11
Upstream Author : Jerrad Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-JavaScript/
* License : GPL + Artist
David Nusinow wrote:
> What's the difference between this and xsm?
It well-integrated with LXDE and other modern desktop environments, the
difference between this and xsm are:
* Removed the session dialog from xsm.
* Use better configuration.
* Provide a nice logout-dialog with the ability to
shut
Quoting Henrique de Moraes Holschuh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Perhaps in future mass ITPs could be mostly filed with only one to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the rest to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead?
>
> That would defeat a lot of the purpose of the ITPs (like look
On fredagen den 29 februari 2008, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 18:47 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > Even there, it looks very much like other "very small" webservers,
> > such as boa, bozohttpd, cherokee, fnord, lighttpd, micro-httpd,
> > mini-httpd or thttpd. What does it do bette
* Kevin Coyner
| Should I remove it manually, or just let it go as the version
| numbers will ensure that it will not be installed?
Doesn't really matter: it will be rejected since there's a newer
version in the archive, but it means you get a reject mail, so if you
want to remove it, that's fin
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 17:44:01 Thijs Kinkhorst, vous avez écrit :
> On Saturday 1 March 2008 17:20, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > It is also pointed out that there are central places, like security
> > fixes, where having too many packages leads to too much work. Sure, but
> > again, it's not relat
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 17:37:40 David Nusinow, vous avez écrit :
> > Basically, a package has bugs because the maintainer or upstream is not
> > reponsive/available/..., not because there are too much *choice*.
>
> Um. No. We have lots of people. We also have lots of software. If we lose
> some
Hi,
A few months ago, I asked a set of questions on development mailing
lists of a few GNU/Linux distributions. This resulted in very
interesting discussions. As promised back then, all the answers from all
distros I contacted can be read at [0] (on the web) or [1] (as an mbox
file).
[0] http://w
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 01:19:50AM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Andrew Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: lxsession
> Version : 0.3
> Upstream Author : Hong Jen Yee(PCMan) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.e
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andrew Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: lxsession
Version : 0.3
Upstream Author : Hong Jen Yee(PCMan) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : (GPL)
Programming Lang: (C)
Description :
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:07:54 -0500, Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:40:55PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
>> > That's why you should avoid using the branch as basis to others
>> > until it's clean and also avoid to make it public (without a
>> > reason) too.
>>
>>
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Why do we have to settle on a quilt based source package, when
> my proposal meets all the requirements anyway? Why does it have to be
> one or the other?
It's not going to be one or the other. Note that your changes on upstream
code can be
Matteo Vescovi wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> * Package name: soothsayer
Hi Matteo,
please see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/01/msg00368.html
In short: You only file *one* ITP for the source package, not ITPs for
ev
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:24:49 +0100, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.03.01.1650 +0100]:
>> It does, if you ship the sources with the series applied. AFAICT,
>> this is not what's usually done.
> ... or if the patches were automatica
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soothsayer
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://soothsayer.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C++
Descrip
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 12:21:03 +0100, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> also sprach Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.29.2153
> +0100]:
>> 3) I propose ./debian/branches/{TopicA,TopicB,TopicC}.diff.gz
>> files. Each diff, applied to the orig.tar.gz , shall recreate for the
>> i
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 14:16:20 +0100, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.03.01.1334 +0100]:
>> The nice thing about Manoj's proposal that we (as in "the security
>> team", for instance) need not care if the Debian maintainer thinks
>> tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/01/08 10:38, Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
>
> Who makes the decision as to how much redundancy is too much? And
> is it crap just because it's redundant?
>
> For example, is micro-httpd redundant crap? There are no bug
> reports, so how much Sec
On Saturday 1 March 2008 17:20, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> It is also pointed out that there are central places, like security fixes,
> where having too many packages leads to too much work. Sure, but again,
> it's not related to choice, but to the overall size of the distribution.
> Here again, the s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/01/08 10:14, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 03/01/08 06:51, David Nusinow wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, Willi
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 05:20:28PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Le Saturday 01 March 2008 16:43:56 Ron Johnson, vous avez écrit :
> > > I wish we had some more of this sort of thinking in our own project and a
> > > little less of yours. Maybe then we'd have fewer bugs in the packages
> > > peopl
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soothsayer-doc
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://soothsayer.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang:
Descri
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soothsayer-data
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://soothsayer.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang:
Descr
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:40:55PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > That's why you should avoid using the branch as basis to others until
> > it's clean and also avoid to make it public (without a reason) too.
>
> This makes it more difficult to ask for review while the branch is in
> progress, whic
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libsoothsayer-dev
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://soothsayer.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C++
also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.03.01.1650 +0100]:
> It does, if you ship the sources with the series applied. AFAICT, this
> is not what's usually done.
... or if the patches were automatically applied when the source is
unpacked, which is where I think we're heading.
--
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libsoothsayer0
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Matteo Vescovi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://soothsayer.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C++
Des
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 16:43:56 Ron Johnson, vous avez écrit :
> > I wish we had some more of this sort of thinking in our own project and a
> > little less of yours. Maybe then we'd have fewer bugs in the packages
> > people actually care about and use.
>
> I say we drop every WM & DE except GN
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/01/08 06:51, David Nusinow wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> >> Why does a package need to clarify what's different about it than oth
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 12:19:33PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, 2008-02-24 at 16:46 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >> Yet, rebasing is still routinely performed in the Linux kernel
> >> development.
> >
> > What I find inter
* martin f. krafft:
> also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.03.01.1334 +0100]:
>> The nice thing about Manoj's proposal that we (as in "the security
>> team", for instance) need not care if the Debian maintainer thinks that
>> upstream needs pristine topic branches, an integration b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/01/08 06:51, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
>> Why does a package need to clarify what's different about it than others
>> like it? Debian is about having the possibility of choosing betwee
Le Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 10:45:31AM +0100, Florian Lohoff a écrit :
>
> So you might devote your time to
>
> a) Find the cause of the build crash
> b) Hunt down the kernel bug in 2.6.24
> c) Poke at the buildd admin to move the buildd to the new disk subsys
This is ridiculus and provocative. I h
Hello folks,
following a short discussion with Erich Schubert on the debtags-devel list[1],
I decided to come with a simple proposal (are DEPs already active and
useful?).
In order to have wnpp bugs better categorized (and, as such, searched, shown,
and managed), it seems a viable option to use
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:40:57AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt a écrit :
> >
> > Due to kernel problems, the mips* buildds haven't been very reliable in
> > the past few weeks, creating a lng backlog of packages that need to
> > be built. As there seems to be a workar
also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.03.01.1334 +0100]:
> The nice thing about Manoj's proposal that we (as in "the security
> team", for instance) need not care if the Debian maintainer thinks that
> upstream needs pristine topic branches, an integration branch, a weave,
> or whate
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:02:39PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> Why does a package need to clarify what's different about it than others
> like it? Debian is about having the possibility of choosing between many
> options for the same thing e.g. openssh, dropbear for sshd, 12 different
> httpd o
* martin f. krafft:
> also sprach Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.29.2153 +0100]:
>> 3) I propose ./debian/branches/{TopicA,TopicB,TopicC}.diff.gz
>> files. Each diff, applied to the orig.tar.gz , shall recreate for
>> the interested user the corresponding branch in my de
On 01/03/2008, Kevin Coyner wrote:
> Should I remove it manually, or just let it go as the version
> numbers will ensure that it will not be installed?
Wait until it moves to DELAYED/0, and gets REJECTED since there's a
newer version in the archive.
Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois
pgpiqZDc1WH4s.pg
A few days ago I uploaded a package to the 7-Day DELAYED queue as an
NMU. Per policy I contacted the maintainer, and he recently fixed
his version and had it uploaded and it is now in the archives,
making my NMU no longer needed. My NMU is in the 2-day queue at
present. Should I remove it manuall
also sprach Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.29.2153 +0100]:
> 3) I propose ./debian/branches/{TopicA,TopicB,TopicC}.diff.gz
> files. Each diff, applied to the orig.tar.gz , shall recreate for
> the interested user the corresponding branch in my development.
>
> Bi
Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> packages migrate? I just got a message from a user who wants to use one
> of the blocked packages (emboss), and I am just so ashamed to answer him
> that he has to use unstable just because it is not built on a platform
> where nobody is using it.
He do
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:36:40PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> it is good news to read that there is a solution being found. However, I
> am a bit confused because previous messages were suggesting that the
> problem was disk speed, not downtime.
Downtime caused by ghc6 build causing multiple k
On 29/02/08 at 23:29 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 01:55:49AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > Note that the whole "did last year projects were successful?" issue is
> > secondary. Even if all of last years projects produced fabulous results
> > that totally changed the
Ups, sorry, wrong list debian-devel. Should have gone to debian-edu ...
--
http://fam-tille.de
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 00:42:02 +0100 (CET)
From: Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Developers
Subject: Re: How important is "Architecture: any" (Was
63 matches
Mail list logo
