Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 21:08, schrieb Russ Allbery:
The current DM implementation is weird in that it's dictated by a GR. It
might be worth getting a ruling from the project secretary on whether we
need another GR to change the details of it (or, better, to make the
details of it up to existing
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org writes:
Am 15.06.2010 21:08, schrieb Russ Allbery:
The current DM implementation is weird in that it's dictated by a GR.
It might be worth getting a ruling from the project secretary on
whether we need another GR to change the details of it (or,
* Paul Wise p...@debian.org, 2010-06-15, 10:14:
I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
or LDAP or something else.
Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
unhappy with the way it is currently implemented.
--
Jakub Wilk
Le Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:57:57AM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
* Paul Wise p...@debian.org, 2010-06-15, 10:14:
I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
or LDAP or something else.
Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
unhappy
Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org writes:
* Paul Wise p...@debian.org, 2010-06-15, 10:14:
I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail
bot or LDAP or something else.
Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am
very unhappy with the way it is
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
that only a sponsor can change.
Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
Ganneff feel free to give us dak patches making DM saner.
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
toli...@debian.org wrote:
I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
while asking for setting the DM-Upload-Allowed: yes flag at the very
same time.
[I am a DM]
Hi there,
Even this is against the spirit of Debian Maintainer Concept, I
believe this is because people are pragmatic.
Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
- HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling
Hello Alexander,
2010/6/14 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org:
So I think asking for DMUA:Yes while seeking an initial sponsor is just
plain wrong, as convincing a DD shouldn't be a one timer. I therefore
ask DMs not to ask to set this flag on the first upload, and DDs not to
do
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:14:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
further and do not mention that in debian/changelog nor in their RFS
mail.
That is generally
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
[..]
[ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
[..]
Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
Why 5 times?
- HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling symnlink,
- arm/armel updated the java package and libraries
On 2010-06-15, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
I guess it is unimportant who exactly writes the lines to
debian/control. But the sponsor should definately
[Mathieu Malaterre, 2010-06-15]
Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
well, it is hard indeed (if you want a new DD for every upload).
Hint: try to ask previous sponsor first!
I completely
[Simon Richter, 2010-06-15]
I don't think it needs to be reflected in the changelog either, as it
doesn't really concern the packaging as such, but only upload
permissions (also, if I should set it, then I'd have to write the
changelog entry, no?).
what about other DDs? I want to have a
David Paleino da...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
toli...@debian.org wrote:
I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
while asking for setting the
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org writes:
[..]
[ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
[..]
Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the
On Tuesday 15 June 2010 05:42:43 Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
that only a sponsor can change.
Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
that only a sponsor can change.
Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
Ganneff feel free to give us dak patches making DM
Hi!
I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
while asking for setting the DM-Upload-Allowed: yes flag at the very
same time.
While I can certainly understand Maintainers want to upload their
packages ASAP themselves, I would like to point out that I consider that
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
toli...@debian.org wrote:
I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
while asking for setting the DM-Upload-Allowed: yes flag at the very
same time.
This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some
21 matches
Mail list logo
