Hi Emmanuel,
On Montag, 5. Oktober 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Thank you very much for the changes. Let's see how it goes, but I
> suspect the volume of notifications will be much better and the need for
> individual subscriptions less critical.
we'll see. you are still subscribed to 1000
Le 03/10/2015 02:56, Holger Levsen a écrit :
> I've limited notifications to unstable and experimental now, and also
> improved
> the code a bit that only one mail per is sent per source package in all
> suites, no matter how many status changes it had. But we should still improve
> it to
Hi Emmanuel,
On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> > I agree and am wondering if we should actually do this, and limit
> > (maintainer) notifications to unstable? What do you think?
> Well, if I understood your "this graph is a lie" properly in your talks,
> I think the
Hi,
(mostly ignoring the rest as this has been addressed already.)
On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I understand that everything is still in development. However I don't
> think a public mailing list is a suitable testbed. My preferred solution
> would be to make
Hi,
Am 30.09.2015 um 12:30 schrieb Holger Levsen:
> Hi,
>
> (mostly ignoring the rest as this has been addressed already.)
>
> On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> I understand that everything is still in development. However I don't
>> think a public mailing list is a
Le 30/09/2015 13:00, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> We have never discussed this before as a team. I vote for unsubscribing
> pkg-java because of the issues that were pointed out already.
I did request the notifications for the team, but I didn't really expect
so many false positives. Sorry for the
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 02:27:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
> Markus (and the others), do you think it's ok to keep the notifications
> if they are limited to unstable ? Or would you prefer disabling them
> completely until the build environment stabilizes?
I think there is value in
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:13:40AM -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 02:27:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> >
> > Markus (and the others), do you think it's ok to keep the notifications
> > if they are limited to unstable ? Or would you prefer disabling them
> >
Am 30.09.2015 um 16:15 schrieb Mattia Rizzolo:
[...]
> This wouldn't work with the current implementation, which is emailing
> $p...@packages.debian.org. Anyway, I received a suggestion of setting up
> a new PTS keyword, so then people can go and subscribe there, maybe
> using the team facility
Hi,
thanks for explaining, Emmanuel!
On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Actually I tend to prefer the reports in unstable. The reports in
> testing are often duplicates of issues already known in unstable, and
> sometimes they are already fixed in unstable when they are
Hi,
On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I would like to take the opportunity to raise the following concern. I
> support the reproducible builds effort but I think the periodic e-mails
> to pkg-java are often not useful enough at the moment. There are far too
> many
Le 29/09/2015 17:08, Holger Levsen a écrit :
> I agree and am wondering if we should actually do this, and limit
> (maintainer)
> notifications to unstable? What do you think?
Well, if I understood your "this graph is a lie" properly in your talks,
I think the reproducibility in testing isn't
12 matches
Mail list logo
