-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/09/14 20:46, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Hi,
Daniel Pocock:
c) offer a paid review service. FTP masters and assistants
can sell their time through an auction process. [...]
I hope this is a joke.
Not entirely I was not suggesting
Le Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 01:09:09PM -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
grep -ir copyright *
Do that over your source and then compare what you have in debian/copyright.
You might be surprised how often that turns up missing stuff. Check your own
packages at least as carefully as you
Daniel Pocock writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
There is one package I recently uploaded where I meant to use a
repackaged tarball to get rid of an embedded binary toolchain JAR. This
is a more nasty mistake of course but thanks to the diligence of the FTP
masters it was spotted
On 05/09/14 17:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
It is true that long NEW processing queues is a big problem. But it
appears that a substantial amount of core team effort is being used to
deal with poor submissions. If we can fix that, we can fix the long
queue.
This is really the root of the
Daniel Pocock writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
This is really the root of the problem and I agree that it would be nice
to find ways to help them. A solution is good for the FTP masters and
good for the project.
I agree.
Another way to look at your proposal may be to compare
On Friday, September 05, 2014 18:21:28 Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 05/09/14 17:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
It is true that long NEW processing queues is a big problem. But it
appears that a substantial amount of core team effort is being used to
deal with poor submissions. If we can fix that, we
On 05/09/14 18:45, Ian Jackson wrote:
Daniel Pocock writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
This is really the root of the problem and I agree that it would be nice
to find ways to help them. A solution is good for the FTP masters and
good for the project.
I agree.
Another way
Hi,
Daniel Pocock:
c) offer a paid review service. FTP masters and assistants can sell
their time through an auction process. [...]
I hope this is a joke.
Not entirely
I was not suggesting people would pay to have their packages approved.
Only that there would be payment for
On 03/09/14 17:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
Daniel Pocock writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
It may not simply be the person
Somebody uploading packages where they are also the upstream may know
the copyright situation inside out and just cut and paste
debian/copyright from one package
Daniel Pocock writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
It may not simply be the person
Somebody uploading packages where they are also the upstream may know
the copyright situation inside out and just cut and paste
debian/copyright from one package to the next and it is always correct
Charles Plessy writes (Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg):
there is one thing that we can do: increase the quality of the
packages that we submit to the NEW queue. Acording to one member of
the FTP Master team, up to 80 % of the packages have a problem [0].
Indeed, when I and others have
On Aug 20, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
I think we need a reputation system here.
Eg, you could sort the NEW queue by something like
number of REJECTs of uploader's packages in last 12 months
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/08/14 16:39, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Aug 20, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
I think we need a reputation system here.
Eg, you could sort the NEW queue by something like
number of REJECTs of uploader's packages in
Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
their mailing list.
Hello,
That seems to be
Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
their mailing list.
Le Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at
Hi!
Thanks for the response. I've had review on my license by the SFLC and
the FSF. See their responses here:
https://wiki.unsystem.net/en/index.php/Libbitcoin/License
Also I have emails from the Debian mailing list on this issue which I
can contribute. Is there anything I need to do to pass
Thank you.
On 13/08/14 09:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging
Hello Charles
Peer review can help, by making sure that the final controllers (the FTP
Master
team) do not waste their time reporting defects that others could have found.
You can find a process for peer review at the URL below.
https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReview
I like a lot the
It has now appeared in the repos! Thanks everyone.
https://packages.qa.debian.org/libb/libbitcoin.html
On 13/08/14 09:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
has been missed. Any information
Hi!
A Debian developer Jonas Smedegard has worked with me to package my
software since I first opened an ITP in April 2012.
Finally we finish to resolve all the outstanding issues after some
months, and I was very happy to see it pushed ready to be uploaded on 17
June.
20 matches
Mail list logo
