On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:54:58PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > (ii) You make a very good argument that policy should continue to give
> > guidance for this kind of situation. The target should probably be
> > put back in policy, but with an explicit note saying it's no
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:27 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Personally, I'd probably add an interactive prompt warning about the
> dangers and stressing that the source package needs to be trusted if stdin
> and stdout are connected to a tty, and otherwise fail and require some
> flag to use the fallb
Paul Wise writes:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:02 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Rather than documenting this fallback in Policy, why not add that
>> fallback directly to uscan?
> uscan is used in situations where one does not want arbitrary code from
> source packages automatically run by uscan. As
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 7:05 AM, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> Would you schedule/organise it?
I'll attend but not organise it.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:02 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Rather than documenting this fallback in Policy, why not add that fallback
> directly to uscan?
uscan is used in situations where one does not want arbitrary code
from source packages automatically run by uscan. As long as `uscan
--safe` igno
On 18-04-12 01:05:46, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> On 2018-04-11 07:41, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Is anyone interested in facilitating a privacy-team BoF at
> > DebConf18?
>
> Yes. Would you schedule/organise it? I'm pretty sure, that many people
> will join, who are not participating in this thread.
We
On 2018-04-11 07:41, Paul Wise wrote:
> Is anyone interested in facilitating a privacy-team BoF at DebConf18?
Yes. Would you schedule/organise it? I'm pretty sure, that many
people will join, who are not participating in this thread.
Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process"):
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:24:23PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > apt-listchanges will present the right section of the changelog
> > anyway.
>
> Assuming your "skip 10 versions and use one changelog stanza"
> suggest
Hello,
On Wed, Apr 11 2018, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm pretty reluctant to specify this sort of optional target that
> works differently in every package that uses it back in Policy because
> it's really not standardized, nor do I think it's possible to
> standardize. If we really want to write s
Adrian Bunk writes:
> Imagine tomorrow a random person from the internet noone has ever heard
> of uploads a package dgit 5.0 to mentors.d.n.
> It is clear that this would not be sponsored.
> "detected by tooling" would mean that this would result in dak
> autorejecting any future uploads of a
Andreas Tille writes:
> That is exactly what I wanted to express. I do not mind the actual
> implementation but writing down in policy that there should be some
> common interface to obtain the upstream source as a fallback to uscan
> (and only as fallback if there is really no chance to use usc
Ian Jackson writes:
> (ii) You make a very good argument that policy should continue to give
> guidance for this kind of situation. The target should probably be
> put back in policy, but with an explicit note saying it's not normally
> desirable, or something.
I think the Policy guidance is th
Ian Jackson wrote:
> > However, after pointing this out to Chris Lamb and re-
> > uploading the package another time he checked and accepted it in less
> > then 24 hours (big thanks again).
>
> It strikes me that if there were comments in the ftpmaster database
> suggestiong the package should be
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:24:23PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW
> process"):
> > A version is published to our users when it gets accepted into
> > the archive.
> >
> > Readable information in apt-listchanges is IMHO more importa
Dear Lumin,
you didnt mention which package of yours is stuck in NEW, could you
please elaborate? Else this seems like a rant out of the blue, without
much checking of facts, like Phil (Hands) thankfully provided.
I also share wookey's observation that NEW is being processed more
quickly than eve
On 11/04/2018 17:00, Luke W Faraone wrote:
> I reviewed the relevant conversation in #debian-ftp. I think if you
> re-read it, the context makes it pretty clear that it was certainly not
> "laughing off the request" — you said something along the lines of "my
> destiny is sealed" and the response w
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:49:17PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> > I wonder, maybe uscan could support debian/get-orig-source as a last
> > resort ?
>
> Only if you pass --trust-source or something. Currently I think
> (hop
On 11/04/18 16:12, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:>> On Wed, Apr
11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
>>> I'm only a DM and I tried to apply for FTP assistant […]
The 2010[1] and 2017[2] call for help both said that one needs to be a
DD, unless one is solely helping with dak (which is n
Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> I wonder, maybe uscan could support debian/get-orig-source as a last
> resort ?
Only if you pass --trust-source or something. Currently I think
(hope!) the damage that can be done by a bad uscan config is fairly
limited.
On 2018-04-11 16:04, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your
contribution
to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
can enter the archive.", will the DD still be motivated
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 02:29:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andreas Tille writes ("Re: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> > In other words: I'm fine with removing the target in rules and replace
> > it by:
> >
> > If there are reasons why uscan can not fetch the upstream source it
> >
Dear Lumin,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
> can enter the archive.", will the DD still be motivated working on NEW
> packages??
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:18:32PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:58:53AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > >
> > > Imho Sean's last mail sums it up pretty well
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=515856#94
> >
> > I have read this, but it does not convi
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 02:29:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> (ii) You make a very good argument that policy should continue to give
> guidance for this kind of situation. The target should probably be
> put back in policy, but with an explicit note saying it's not normally
> desirable, or someth
Andreas Tille writes ("Re: Debian Policy 4.1.4.0 released"):
> In other words: I'm fine with removing the target in rules and replace
> it by:
>
> If there are reasons why uscan can not fetch the upstream source it
> is recommended to provide a script debian/get-orig-source .
>
> If we do
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:58:53AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> >
> > Imho Sean's last mail sums it up pretty well
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=515856#94
>
> I have read this, but it does not convince me. My rule to get the
> upstream packagage was always: use uscan, if d
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:21:10PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Gert Wollny writes ("Re: Urging for solution to the slow NEW queue process
> (completeed)"):
> > I might add that in case of the package I was talking about there vtk7,
> > I got another reject because I used the same version for the
Gert Wollny writes ("Re: Urging for solution to the slow NEW queue process
(completeed)"):
> I might add that in case of the package I was talking about there vtk7,
> I got another reject because I used the same version for the re-
> upload, and after that long time it was assumed that the commen
Sorry, hit the wrong button and the email went out incomplete, if yo
read the other mail you can skip to (--).
Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 13:51 +0200 schrieb Gert Wollny:
> Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 07:08 + schrieb Lumin:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'm sorry for repeating this topic in -deve
Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 07:08 + schrieb Lumin:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm sorry for repeating this topic in -devel without reading all the
> followups in this thread [1] which seems to be dying. Is there
> any conclusion in the thread[1] ?
As the initator of this thread I'd like to chime in. My
>Looking at the oldest item in the queue (node-mimelib, 7 months), I see
>that the upstream README[1] was changed on Mar 11th to read:
>
> NB! This project is deprecated
>
>All users of this project are urged to find an alternative as it is not
>maintained anymore.
>
>Obviously, this is nothing to
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joel Cross
* Package name: swagger-ui
Version : 2.2.10
Upstream Author : Tony Tam
* URL : http://swagger.io
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: JavaScript
Description : Collection of assets to dynamically ge
On 2018-04-11 10:54 +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
>
> If one excludes the node packages, the current state of NEW looks rather
> good. It suggests[2] that the average wait for non-node packages is
> about a fortnight.
>
> This is something for which I think we should be congratulating the
> ftp-mas
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:50:22AM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> > If one excludes the node packages, the current state of NEW looks rather
> > good. It suggests[2] that the average wait for non-node packages is
> > about a fortnight.
> Fortnight is the average of existing package in queue, not average t
On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 07:08 +, Lumin wrote:
> [2] https://ftp-master.debian.org/stat/new-5years.png
Does this graph show the length of the NEW queue over time or the
numbers of packages passing through NEW over time?
Ian.
Le 11/04/2018 à 10:54, Philip Hands a écrit :
> Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
>>> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
>>> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
>>> can en
Il 11/04/2018 09:44, Andrey Rahmatullin ha scritto:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
>> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
>> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
>> can enter the archive.", will the DD st
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:54:11AM +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
> >> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
> >> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your pack
Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
>> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
>> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
>> can enter the archive.", will the DD still be motivated workin
Hi Oliver,
2018-04-11 16:30 GMT+08:00 Oliver Meißner :
> Hi debian-team,
>
> I just plan to contribute the debian project and care about the
> orphaned package storebackup, which I use at home and work during the
> last maybe ten years.
Thank you for your attention on this package. Note that you
Hi debian-team,
I just plan to contribute the debian project and care about the
orphaned package storebackup, which I use at home and work during the
last maybe ten years.
While exploring
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=856299,
I noticed, that
Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/git
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 07:08:21AM +, Lumin wrote:
> Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
> to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months so that your package
> can enter the archive.", will the DD still be motivated working on NEW
> packages??? Please conv
Hi folks,
I'm sorry for repeating this topic in -devel without reading all the
followups in this thread [1] which seems to be dying. Is there
any conclusion in the thread[1] ?
Briefly speaking, if a DD was told that "Thank you for your contribution
to Debian but please wait for at least 2 months
43 matches
Mail list logo
