Hi,
I noticed that we now have long descriptions somewhere else, however I
somehow missed the consequence, that UDD now does not feature the
English long descriptions as well.
I have written the UDD importer for DDTP descriptions and noticed
that the location where I was drawing the dscriptions f
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> Package: qa.debian.org
> Severity: normal
>
> See for example http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dpkg.html
>
> In the "general" pane, it says
>
> source: dpkg (source, admin)
>^^
>
> while it should be
>
> source: dpkg (required, a
Hi Raphaël and everyone,
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 07:49:40AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I would like to design a new infrastructure that would replace the DDPO
> and the PTS, fix many current problems, and enable us to introduce new
> features to help package maintainers.
First of all, I'd li
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 08:18:55AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> - the machine is upgraded to something recent (currently it's a machine
> which was obsoleted by HP in 2005, so there's some margin for
> improvement). There's work in progress on that by DSA.
If I would have a vote on this I wo
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 07:49:40AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> PPS for Zack: I have extended the document since the version that you
> reviewed.
Thanks. In the current form it completely addresses my concerns, still
without completely sacrificing the commitment part which is mentioned as
a so
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
See for example http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dpkg.html
In the "general" pane, it says
source: dpkg (source, admin)
^^
while it should be
source: dpkg (required, admin)
The problem is alwo visible for e.g.
6 matches
Mail list logo
