On 5/11/07, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good idea. That might make my reports obsolete, and that would be OK
for me.
Integrating it into the newly ressurected dehs might be useful too.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 18:07 +1000, Paul Wise wrote:
> On 5/10/07, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Should be better now.
> > http://people.debian.org/~bartm/borg/outdated.html
>
> Excellent. For even more usefulness points, this could be integrated
> into qa.d.o/developer.php - perha
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 09:51 +0200, "Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There's at least one false positive left. See "picard" package.
>
> Regards, Adam.
I verified whether "picard" [0] would be a false positive on this list
[1]. It has no version in Unstable and it has no version in the
N
On 5/10/07, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Should be better now.
http://people.debian.org/~bartm/borg/outdated.html
Excellent. For even more usefulness points, this could be integrated
into qa.d.o/developer.php - perhaps as extra columns in the watch area
that would be initially hidde
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bart Martens a écrit :
> On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 08:14 +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 23:16 -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>>> [Bart Martens]
I've thought about adding an column for the versions in experimental,
but that is
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 08:14 +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 23:16 -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > [Bart Martens]
> > > I've thought about adding an column for the versions in experimental,
> > > but that is not a high priority to me because this does not change
> > > that Debia
[Peter Samuelson]
> Uh ... I thought the point of your project was to help package
> maintainers. Obviously if the maintainer has put something in
> experimental, he has already done the work to package it!
>From my point of view, the goal of utnubu project is helping package
maintainers hel
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 23:16 -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Bart Martens]
> > I've thought about adding an column for the versions in experimental,
> > but that is not a high priority to me because this does not change
> > that Debian Unstable is outdated for the listed packages.
>
> Uh ... I
[Bart Martens]
> I've thought about adding an column for the versions in experimental,
> but that is not a high priority to me because this does not change
> that Debian Unstable is outdated for the listed packages.
Uh ... I thought the point of your project was to help package
maintainers.
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 20:36 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Tue, 01 May 2007 14:02:16 +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> > I have updated the list to hide packages with identical upstream
> > version numbers but with different epochs. This might hide some
> > real positives but most likely h
Hello!
On Tue, 01 May 2007 14:02:16 +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> I have updated the list to hide packages with identical upstream
> version numbers but with different epochs. This might hide some
> real positives but most likely hides more false positives.
I suggest to take into account experime
On ti, 2007-05-01 at 14:29 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 May 2007 14:02, Bart Martens wrote:
> > I have updated the list to hide packages with identical upstream
> > version numbers but with different epochs. This might hide some real
> > positives but most likely hides more false positi
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 02:39:27PM +0200, Eric Lavarde wrote:
> Hello Bart,
>
> is there some kind of agreement between Debian and Ubuntu concerning the
> distribution part of the version?
The scheme is described here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment#UbuntuPackages
which is linked, al
Hello Bart,
is there some kind of agreement between Debian and Ubuntu concerning the
distribution part of the version?
I ask this because you seem to assume that:
X.Y.Z-K (Debian) << X.Y.Z-L (Ubuntu)
X.Y.Z-K (Debian) << X.Y.Z-KubuntuA (Ubuntu)
(also dfsg stuff doesn't s
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 14:02, Bart Martens wrote:
> I have updated the list to hide packages with identical upstream
> version numbers but with different epochs. This might hide some real
> positives but most likely hides more false positives.
There is also:
binutils 2.17cvs20070426-3 2.17.2007
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 11:49 +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 11:21]:
> > Another approach for identifying packages to be updated in Debian to
> > newer upstream releases is by comparing Debian with Ubuntu. Here is a
> > list of packages that are newer
16 matches
Mail list logo
