Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
I think a generic way to allow people (inc those not in the QA group) to
add QA report links to each package with issues that QA report covers.
I think a mail bot is the way to implement this, some ideas on that:
To: pts-rep...@qa.d.o
new broken-shlibs-l
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:19:26PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The collation of all those data will give us a better view on the
> maintenance status of each package and it could be displayed on the PTS.
> We could also use those info to direct new contributors to help in
> existing packages i
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:16:28AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The best results are achieved if everyone participates so I'd rather find
> ways to make it painless for everybody first. But knowing how diverse the
> opinions are, we will probably have to do something like this.
There's no way
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:28:17 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > That's going to be a lot of fairly mindless paperwork for someone who's
> > the member of a large, active team with a lot of packages.
> Agreed. I'm not sure what's the best way to handle this.
> Maybe the form should make it easy to g
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> Agreed. I'm not sure what's the best way to handle this.
>
> Maybe the form should make it easy to give the same answers to all
> packages that are maintained by a given team ? We could use easily
> identify the team by finding out an email that matches @lists\. in
>
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> (generated by the Makefile in ~kibi/shlibs-check.git, on gluck.)
attached dd-list with uploaders
sed -n '/^#/!s/:$//p' mapping.list | dd-list -i -u
--
Loïc Minier
Guenter Geiger (Debian/GNU)
jack-audio-connection-kit (U)
rezound
Jacek Śli
Hi all!
As suggested by KiBi I am forwarding this here to get your opinion
about removing this package.
Thanks
Christoph
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Considering package removal [glademm]
Weitersenden-Datum: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 20:23:20 + (UTC)
Weitersenden-Von: debian-men
Cyril Brulebois (21/12/2008):
> OK, since it doesn't look like useless, I'll look into it and report
> back in a moment.
Attached, a list (103 source packages) based on the contents of
gluck:/org/lintian.debian.org/laboratory/source/*/debfiles/shlibs.local
(generated by the Makefile in ~kibi/shl
Loïc Minier (21/12/2008):
> I'm all for it; over time I came across a bunch of broken packages
> due to shlibs.local files, or simply with the risk of these files
> bitrotting and causing issues later.
OK, since it doesn't look like useless, I'll look into it and report
back in a moment.
Mraw,
K
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> I'm wondering whether it might be a good idea to track those in source
> packages, so as to make sure bugs got filed, and that those files go
> away. Having a fixed shlibs file would be profitable to all packages
> linking against this library, rather
Hi
Maybe this package should be removed from unstable?
Cheers
Luk
Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> I have just been trying to make roaming wireless work on my laptop and
> came across waproamd, which sounded great. However, further digging
> reveals that it has been obsoleted upstream and the origin
Hello,
context: debian/shlibs.local can be used to work around broken shlibs
files (Policy §8.6.5). Bugs are supposed to be filed, then fixed, and
shlibs.local files should then disappear.
I'm wondering whether it might be a good idea to track those in source
packages, so as to make sure bugs got
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 12:05:40PM +0100, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
> As per subject.
As you might have figured out, this was a mistake.
13:26 godog: :) @ your -qa mail :)
13:27 KiBi: heh, I should properly wake up before looking at RCs :)
13:28 :)
filippo
--
Filippo Giunchedi - http://esau
As per subject.
Relevant diff:
diff -u net-snmp-5.4.1~dfsg/debian/snmpd.init
net-snmp-5.4.1~dfsg/debian/snmpd.init
--- net-snmp-5.4.1~dfsg/debian/snmpd.init
+++ net-snmp-5.4.1~dfsg/debian/snmpd.init
@@ -40,12 +40,12 @@
start)
echo -n "Starting network management services:"
if [ "$SNM
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:19:26PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I would like to propose something new that would partially supersede
> the work done by the MIA team and that would also generate new
> information somehow related to the topic of WNPP.
Well, I like the principle (who having a feel
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
>
> > The basic idea is quite simple, we want to ensure that each package is
> > maintained as well as possible and for this we need to ensure that
> > it has one or more active maintainer(s). Hence every X months, each
> > mainta
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
> I like the general idea, here are a few points/questions:
>
> Have a procedure to not receive the mail in the future (perhaps making it
> possible to (manually, via email?) re-enable at some later time)
The best results are achieved if everyone part
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Enrico Zini wrote:
> I quite liked the idea of allowing to set such attributes in the control
> file because, rather than looking like someone putting their nose on how
> one maintains packages, they are a handy way to document the
> maintainer's intentions with the package, pr
18 matches
Mail list logo
