Hi,
for those who wonder why their package did not yet hit proposed-updates,
they want to have a look on [1] and [2].
The backlog we had is now decreasing, d-i builds should have been
started by now.
Greetings
Martin
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/06/msg7.html
[2] h
onscreen
Yes paste bit Once creating Copy. Minimize
WinXP. Such best resolved guy lam. client helps redirect
Reviews Science Shopping Society Sports
overcome illegal operation panel
Security profiling
aspects POD damage tolerance concepts. curves organized series
riskfree Name: Las
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 11:05:39 -0500, Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hubert Chan dijo [Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 02:44:01PM -0400]:
>> Yes, I understand your point. And truth be told, I sometimes forget
>> about bugs too, without a ping.
>>
>> My concern as a maintainer is that in case of a bad
Bernhard R. Link dijo [Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 05:37:11PM +0200]:
> > > > permission and upload to -delayed - and then go on with my
> > > > business. If I must remember a week later to re-ping for your
> > > > permission, I might just forget about the bug completely.
> > >
> > > And who looks after
Hubert Chan dijo [Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 02:44:01PM -0400]:
> Yes, I understand your point. And truth be told, I sometimes forget
> about bugs too, without a ping.
>
> My concern as a maintainer is that in case of a bad NMU, it shouldn't
> add any unnecessary burden to me. If it is very easy for m
* Jeff Licquia ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060801 16:53]:
> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 11:21 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [Jeff Licquia]
> > > Most of the current tests pass. Of those that don't, most are
> > > recognized deficiencies. In sum, there are two potential issues
> > > with Debian and the
* Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060801 14:25]:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:58:57AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > * Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060731 19:52]:
> > > I completely understand your point - but still, it still places an
> > > unnecessary burden. Often, when I do NMUs it
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 16:02 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> The test results below were run on etch as of July 16.
Something I forgot to point out: these results were run on i386. While
I don't expect results to be much different for other architectures, it
would be helpful to run the tests on ia64,
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 11:53 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Jeff Licquia ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060731 22:18]:
> > These failures are common to all distributions using X.org 7. Several
> > symbols have moved from one library to another.
>
> Would that failure also appear with LSB 1.3?
We would mos
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 11:21 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Jeff Licquia]
> > Most of the current tests pass. Of those that don't, most are
> > recognized deficiencies. In sum, there are two potential issues
> > with Debian and the LSB: a possible bug in cpio, and an issue with
> > the libX1
This is a summary of the AM reports for July 2006.
Six applicants became maintainers.
Charles Fry
After obtaining a B.S. in Computer Science at Brigham Young University,
I worked for two years doing distributed systems software development
for the WhizBang! Labs. When they closed their door
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:58:57AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060731 19:52]:
> > I completely understand your point - but still, it still places an
> > unnecessary burden. Often, when I do NMUs it is because I found a
> > bug I can fix _and_ because I found
* Jeff Licquia ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060731 22:18]:
> >From "libchk":
>
> libX11.so.6 478 FAIL
> libX11.so.6 479 FAIL
> libX11.so.6 480 FAIL
> libX11.so.6 481 FAIL
>
> These failures are common to all distributions using X.org 7. Several
> symbols have moved from one library to another.
Would th
* Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060731 19:52]:
> I completely understand your point - but still, it still places an
> unnecessary burden. Often, when I do NMUs it is because I found a
> bug I can fix _and_ because I found some available time to work on
> it. Of course, I don't want to step on yo
[Jeff Licquia]
> Most of the current tests pass. Of those that don't, most are
> recognized deficiencies. In sum, there are two potential issues
> with Debian and the LSB: a possible bug in cpio, and an issue with
> the libX11 ABI that is common to X.org distributions.
If I got this right, we c
15 matches
Mail list logo
