Hi,
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 09:26:25AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Therefore if you uploaded something that is not redistributable please
> file a bug against the snapshot.debian.org pseudo-package asking for
> removal:
fair enough to request that responsibility from the maintainers.
But woul
Hi,
2010/5/11 Patrick Schoenfeld :
>
> fair enough to request that responsibility from the maintainers.
> But wouldn't it be a less error-prove procedure to handle
> snapshot removals while processing RM bugs against ftp.d.o?
Would not that remove distributable packages which no longer belong
t
Hi.
Excerpts from Hector Oron's message of Ter Mai 11 05:02:34 -0300 2010:
(...)
> 2010/5/11 Patrick Schoenfeld :
> >
> > fair enough to request that responsibility from the maintainers.
> > But wouldn't it be a less error-prove procedure to handle
> > snapshot removals while processing RM bugs ag
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 09:26:25AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > Therefore if you uploaded something that is not redistributable please
> > file a bug against the snapshot.debian.org pseudo-package asking for
> > removal:
>
> fair enou
On 11/05/10 03:26, Peter Palfrader wrote:
Short version:
--
If you uploaded stuff to debian that is not redistributable you
will have to let the snapshot people know to remove it.
Would it be feasible to have some sort of automation surrounding this?
Breaches that are fixed by a s
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> On 11/05/10 03:26, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>>
>> Short version:
>> --
>>
>> If you uploaded stuff to debian that is not redistributable you
>> will have to let the snapshot people know to remove it.
>
> Would it be feasible to have some sort
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Wed, 12 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> > Would it be feasible to have some sort of automation surrounding this?
> > Breaches that are fixed by a subsequent upload will very likely contain
> > some strings in the changelog: strip, distributable,
On 18/05/10 04:13, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Peter Palfrader wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Would it be feasible to have some sort of automation surrounding this?
Breaches that are fixed by a subsequent upload will very likely contain
some strings in the cha
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> >Most of the repackaging is done because we don't _want_ to redistribute
> >those files not because we do not have the right to redistribute them.
>
> [citation needed]
>
> My perception of the matter is the other way around.
Take the case of stripped
On 19/05/10 10:08, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Most of the repackaging is done because we don't _want_ to redistribute
those files not because we do not have the right to redistribute them.
[citation needed]
My perception of the matter is the other way ar
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> On 19/05/10 10:08, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 May 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Most of the repackaging is done because we don't _want_ to redistribute
those files not because we do not have the right to redistribute them.
>>>
>>> [cit
11 matches
Mail list logo
