Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Now, does the autobuilder get moved to another machine, or do I just put on
my scary face when adding people to the authorised uploaders list? grin
If you are using i386: umlbuilder
That way you need an uml exploit and a root exploit to use the uml
exploit.
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Now, does the autobuilder get moved to another machine, or do I just put on
my scary face when adding people to the authorised uploaders list? grin
If you are using i386: umlbuilder
That way you need an uml exploit and a root exploit to use the uml
exploit.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
2) Download tracking, both by count and yes I'll upload this via web
browser. I'm still up in the air about whether there will be apt-getable
resources, or whether pre-built binary debs
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
4) Automatically removing packages once they've been uploaded seems to be a
general winner.
Couldn't you just reference packages.d.o (or a local Packages/Sources file)?
Sorry, I don't understand this. Are you suggesting that I scan an updated
Packages
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:42:42PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Maybe you could also reuse / build upon rene from the dak suite. (Maybe it's not
That's the problem with the FTP masters naming everything after women -
nobody
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:23:05AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
It'll probably be more timely and less bandwidth intensive to track -changes...
Well, I mostly have Packages/Sources for unstable available. In my book, I prefer
parsing those over automatically processing email. Also, it doesn't
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:39:31AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:42:42PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Maybe you could also reuse / build upon rene from the dak suite. (Maybe it's not
That's the
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:21:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:23:05AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
It'll probably be more timely and less bandwidth intensive to track -changes...
Well, I mostly have Packages/Sources for unstable available. In my book, I prefer
parsing those over
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get packages for sponsorship which have built in a clean sid
chroot out of my system, you can be fairly sure of that.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:05:08PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get packages for sponsorship which have built in a clean
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:05:08PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:21:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a close relationship with the people whose
A worthy
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
2) Download tracking, both by count and yes I'll upload this via web
browser. I'm still up in the air about whether there will be apt-getable
resources, or whether pre-built binary debs
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
4) Automatically removing packages once they've been uploaded seems to be a
general winner.
Couldn't you just reference packages.d.o (or a local Packages/Sources file)?
Sorry, I don't understand this. Are you suggesting that I scan an updated
Packages
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:42:42PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Maybe you could also reuse / build upon rene from the dak suite. (Maybe
it's not
That's the problem with the FTP masters naming everything after women -
nobody
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:23:05AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
It'll probably be more timely and less bandwidth intensive to track
-changes...
Well, I mostly have Packages/Sources for unstable available. In my book, I
prefer
parsing those over automatically processing email. Also, it
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:39:31AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:42:42PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Maybe you could also reuse / build upon rene from the dak suite. (Maybe
it's not
That's the
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:23:05AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
It'll probably be more timely and less bandwidth intensive to track
-changes...
Well, I mostly have Packages/Sources for unstable available. In my book, I
prefer
parsing those
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:21:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get packages for sponsorship which have built in a clean sid
chroot out of my system, you can be fairly sure of that.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:05:08PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get packages for sponsorship which have built in a clean
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:05:08PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be
Since you only get
On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19.52, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull
Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
There are many people who got a signature by a DD's key who are not applying
for DDship, probably never will, and who probably should not be able to
upload to your queue. Getting a signature is just a confirmation of identity,
after
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 08:45:00AM -0700, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
The final question I'd like feedback on is this: how many sponsors
would consider pointing their sponsees to this service, rather than
whatever methods you're using now? The benefits are that other
sponsors might
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:22:22AM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19.52, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the
Hi.
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
2) Download tracking, both by count and yes I'll upload this via web
browser. I'm still up in the air about whether there will be apt-getable
resources, or whether pre-built binary debs will be accessable. I don't
particularly want to be a general
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a close relationship with the people whose
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:21:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a close relationship with the people whose
A worthy
On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19.52, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull
Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
There are many people who got a signature by a DD's key who are not applying
for DDship, probably never will, and who probably should not be able to
upload to your queue. Getting a signature is just a confirmation of identity,
after
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 08:45:00AM -0700, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
The final question I'd like feedback on is this: how many sponsors
would consider pointing their sponsees to this service, rather than
whatever methods you're using now? The benefits are that other
sponsors might
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:22:22AM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19.52, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking
Hi.
Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
2) Download tracking, both by count and yes I'll upload this via web
browser. I'm still up in the air about whether there will be apt-getable
resources, or whether pre-built binary debs will be accessable. I don't
particularly want to be a general
Matthew Palmer wrote:
So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me.
Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to
me. I want to maintain a close relationship with the people whose
package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a
package
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't it be cool if we could remove the SPOF of sponsors, and have a
group of
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:57:55PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
The final question I'd like feedback on is this: how many sponsors
would consider pointing their sponsees to this service, rather than
whatever methods you're using now? The benefits are that other
sponsors might occasionally
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't it be cool if we could remove
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull for
other purposes too.
Why not just check if the key is
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull for
other
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:11:08PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:11:08PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing.
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't it be cool if we could remove the SPOF of sponsors, and have a
group of
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:57:55PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
The final question I'd like feedback on is this: how many sponsors
would consider pointing their sponsees to this service, rather than
whatever methods you're using now? The benefits are that other
sponsors might occasionally
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't it be cool if we could remove
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull for
other purposes too.
Why not just check if the key is
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would be usefull for
other
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
files against it sounds good to. And the keyring would
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:11:08PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing. The comment was along the lines of
wouldn't
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any
AM after it has been verified, and checking the signature on the dsc
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:11:08PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been
reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a helps me thing to a
could help lots of people thing.
54 matches
Mail list logo
