On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:21:59PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
But he /does/ do the job - people who are trusted to be Debian
developers end up in that state and as yet, nobody who plainly shouldn't
have been in Debian seems to have got in, which is a good sign.
Well, what about the people
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 11:14:46AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
er, we have a leader, and he has a delegate, the DAM. The DPL and the
DAM are those who can change who the DAM is, through normal
functions.
Well, that's the theory, anyway...
--
G. Branden Robinson|
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:19:20PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
I would much prefer the current system where the elected
DPL has the absolute power over the delegates.
Oh, is *that* what the current system is? I thought it was in actual
fact quite different. ;-)
(In fact, even in theory your
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 05:03:08PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 12:22:35PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
Where did this full speed expectation come from? Yes, it slows down the
process a bit, but in general this is not a big problem.
It comes from the people who
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:19:20PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
I would much prefer the current system where the elected
DPL has the absolute power over the delegates.
(In fact, even in theory your statement is incorrect, as a review of the
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:36:35PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
While I have my gripes with the DAM process, I don't blame the holder(s)
of that position for some developers in the past having proven
untrustworthy. The DAM should not be embarrassed by having let in
someone who also fooled
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:57:51PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| An NM can do little more if he sees a problem in the Debian way of
| doing things.
You can't change a system from the outside.
Actually that's not true. The mere observation of a system will change
it. Jamie, by just
Jamin W. Collins wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:17:25PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
What's the alternative?
A more responsive DAM, one that has time for the tasks that the job
requires. This would reduce the wait time for DAM approval and remove
the need for special treatment.
Yes, yes,
Jamin W. Collins wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Someone who enters Debian is in a position to upload a package that
could backdoor a very large number of machines. Attention to detail at
the DAM stage is *more* important than pretty much any other
* (Nathanael Nerode)
| I'm sure no DDs want to volunteer *while* there's someone officially
| in the job and the DPL is satisfied with them, as it might be
| perceived as an attack, and wouldn't have any effect anyway! If the
| DPL *asked* for volunteers, that might be different.
But would the
On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 09:18, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
* (Nathanael Nerode)
| I'm sure no DDs want to volunteer *while* there's someone officially
| in the job and the DPL is satisfied with them, as it might be
| perceived as an attack, and wouldn't have any effect anyway! If the
| DPL
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 05:08:42PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 09:18, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
* (Nathanael Nerode)
| I'm sure no DDs want to volunteer *while* there's someone officially
| in the job and the DPL is satisfied with them, as it might be
|
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 11:20:57AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
So, who does DAM report to?
In actual fact, no one in particular.
Who can do something about this extremely long wait?
Theoretically, the DPL.
--
G. Branden Robinson| To be is to do -- Plato
Debian
Oh dear, Ted T'so just uploaded it and assumed maintainership...
I assume what was meant was that a prospective DD was interested in
adopting the package?
But Ted T'so could be his sponsor now that he has hijacked judy.
I've cc-ed Eduardo Cermeño as I think he's not on this list yet.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:33:22AM -0400, Work Needing Prospective
Packages wrote:
gnome-objc (#165642), orphaned 263 days ago
Description: objective-c bindings for gtk/gnome (obs.)
Reverse Depends:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:33:22AM -0400, Work Needing Prospective
Packages wrote:
judy (#172772), orphaned 210 days ago
Description: C library for creating and accessing dynamic arrays
Reverse Depends:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:33:22AM -0400, Work Needing Prospective
Packages wrote:
py-xmlrpc (#161224), orphaned 296 days ago
Description: Implementation of the XML-RPC protocol for Python
Let me guess... the
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:15:31PM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:33:22AM -0400, Work Needing Prospective
Packages wrote:
judy (#172772), orphaned 210 days ago
Description: C library
Graham Wilson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 12:33:22AM -0400, Work Needing Prospective
Packages wrote:
judy (#172772), orphaned 210 days ago
Description: C library for creating and accessing dynamic arrays
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 08:25:57AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
There's someone on d-mentors wanting to adopt this. As in the BTS:
Debian Bug report logs - #172772
ITA: judy -- C library for creating and accessing dynamic
Oh dear, Ted T'so just uploaded it and assumed maintainership...
Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
[junit-freenet (#165504), orphaned 264 days ago]
When I look at the cvs, two classes have been commited 8 month ago, the
other 23 month ago!..
I will adopt this package but I won't upload a new version. I have asked
for its removal instead (#200949). Let's see which other
Hi, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
As of today, I've been awaiting
DAM approval now for 155 days, with no end to the wait in sight. I've
already adopted one orphaned package (Jabber) and made significant
improvements to it. However, the 150+ day wait for DAM approval has
deterred me from looking
Joshua Kwan wrote:
svgalib (#173471), orphaned 205 days ago
Description: Console SVGA display libraries
Of all those people, someone surely has an interest in this. Or
perhaps it's time to just drop this crash-inducing security-scary
package?
This one kind of shocked
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:58:55PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 08:25:57AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
There's someone on d-mentors wanting to adopt this. As in the BTS:
Debian Bug report logs - #172772
ITA: judy -- C library for creating and accessing dynamic
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Oh guys. I'm waiting some 500 days now. I think that's a record (the
current is around 470). And I'm still working and contributing. Some nice
other DDs stepped forward and wrote mails to the DAM but that didn't cause
anything.
Robert.
As of today, I've been
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 05:06:45PM +0200, Robert J?rdens wrote:
Oh guys. I'm waiting some 500 days now. I think that's a record (the
current is around 470). And I'm still working and contributing. Some
nice other DDs stepped forward and wrote mails to the DAM but that
didn't cause anything.
No, you've been waiting 188 days (as of today) for DAM according to:
Hm, there are two possibilities:
a) I'm blind
b) You're wrong
because...
2002-01-04. I'm only referring to the time since the application was
its... *January*2002* and today is *July*2003* - its about year and half.
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 07:23:55PM +0200, Mateusz Papiernik wrote:
No, you've been waiting 188 days (as of today) for DAM according to:
Hm, there are two possibilities:
a) I'm blind
b) You're wrong
Ahh I'm indeed wrong, misread the year both times. You have amazing
patience if you
Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:58:55PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 08:25:57AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
There's someone on d-mentors wanting to adopt this. As in the BTS:
Debian Bug report logs - #172772
ITA: judy -- C library
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 23:25 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 11:58:55PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 08:25:57AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
There's someone on d-mentors wanting to adopt this. As in the
Report about packages that need work for Jul 11, 2003
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 67
Number of packages offered up for adoption this week: 5
Total number of orphaned packages: 187
Number of packages orphaned this week: 2
The number in parenthesis after each package name is
Hi folks,
I won't apologize for the long email. When I started writing this I
hoped it would be rather short. The fact that it isn't only tells me
that I was right -- about two years ago. I can't believe that the QA
people can say, with a straight face, that they are willing to maintain
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
I won't apologize for the long email. When I started writing this I
hoped it would be rather short. The fact that it isn't only tells me
that I was right -- about two years ago. I can't believe that the QA
people can
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 08:49:46 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
calc (#175399), orphaned 186 days ago Description: An advanced
calculator and mathematical tool for Emacs Reverse Depends:
riece-ndcc
Maybe the maintainer of riece-ndcc cares about this?
I use this
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
judy (#172772), orphaned 210 days ago
Description: C library for creating and accessing dynamic arrays
Reverse Depends: libjudy-dev
I thought that bogus bogofilter depended on this for building...
Iirc (but I only follw
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
g5 (#165500), orphaned 264 days ago
Description: gtk-based 5-in-a-row game
Not an attractive one?
It's still gtk1 and uses O and X characters to display the pieces,
so not attractive is probably the correct description. The AI
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
docbook-to-man (#154590), orphaned 347 days ago
Description: Converter from DocBook SGML into roff -man macros
Reverse Depends: gtk-doc-tools
If gtk-doc-tools depends on this, perhaps the GTK+ folk care
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
junit-freenet (#165504), orphaned 264 days ago
Description: basic reimplementation of the JUnit unit testing
framework
Ah... Java...
From the author:
This is a basic reimplementation of the JUnit unit testing
On 11-Jul-03, 02:21 (CDT), Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because it's damn near impossible to get the things removed.
Huh? Submit a bug report against ftp.debian.org, and ask that the
package be removed. What's so hard about it?
I suppose there might be an issue the original
Steve Greenland wrote:
Or perhaps we should just decree that no unmaitained packages go out
in a stable release. At the beginning of the freeze, mark all the WNPP
packages for removal (along with their dependencies :-)), and then see
if we can inspire some reaction.
Good idea! An even better
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
wavtools (#155263), orphaned 342 days ago
Description: WAV play, record, and compression
Just like sox! Not really...
Well, wavtools is a pile of crap, as detailed by Daniel Kobras in
#97589. I just filed for its removal.
Lukas
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
py-xmlrpc (#161224), orphaned 296 days ago
Description: Implementation of the XML-RPC protocol for Python
Let me guess... the snake lovers came up with something better?
py-xmlrpc is integrated into the Python 2.2
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
I can't believe that the QA people can say, with a straight face,
that they are willing to maintain this pile of dung until someone
shows up. If we have so many maintainers and there are more at the
burg's doors piling
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:49:46AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
gphone (#161708), orphaned 293 days ago
Description: X/GTK-based internet telephone.
I'd thought there'd be more people interested in this kind of thing...
There's newer, vastly more widely implemented
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 04:28:33PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
gphone (#161708), orphaned 293 days ago
Description: X/GTK-based internet telephone.
I'd thought there'd be more people interested in this kind of thing...
There's newer, vastly more widely implemented
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:32:01AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
Huh? Submit a bug report against ftp.debian.org, and ask that the
package be removed. What's so hard about it?
I wish it would be that easy. I haven't read the thread, but I'm
willing to bet someone has already declared me a
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:34:23PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 04:28:33PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
gphone (#161708), orphaned 293 days ago
Description: X/GTK-based internet telephone.
I'd thought there'd be more people interested in
On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 03:13, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I use this package, and am interested in adopting it, except
that I note that Colin Walters states that:
I am orphaning the calc package; it is now included in the GNU Emacs
CVS, and will be in the coming 20.3
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:34:23PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
So, you mean, this is not the package our users should be looking at
when they search for a VoIP application? It's not only orphaned but
not even used? *HINT* *HINT*
It would be nice to see some popularity-contest data
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:32:01AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 11-Jul-03, 02:21 (CDT), Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because it's damn near impossible to get the things removed.
Huh? Submit a bug report against ftp.debian.org, and ask that the
package be removed. What's
But apparently I was under the wrong impression about which branch of
Emacs development was going to be released. I committed calc to what
was HEAD at the time, and I thought that was going to become 21.3, but
there was a different branch slated for release. Anyways, calc will be
in 21.4.
51 matches
Mail list logo
