On Samstag, 28. Dezember 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Now that the backports archive has been integrated more completely
> into the regular Debian archive, it would be great to see uploads
> to backports show up in the news section of the PTS.
excellent idea!
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On 2014-01-02 17:51, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
Is there a reason why britney doesn't just use the default upload
priority for "new" packages, and not even try to caluclate the
highest
of all uploads in this case? I understand that's the same net result
as the current algorithm (which is to calculat
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 05:13:02PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Urgencies are "sticky", meaning that for any given migration the
> effective urgency used is the highest of all uploads with version
> numbers higher than the package in testing - i.e. if 1.0-1 is
> uploaded at "high", and -2 at "me
On 2014-01-02 18:01 +0100, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. (BTW, it was a typo in my original
> message; I had meant to say that the version in _sid_ was 0.9.1-3.)
>
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:58:12PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Urgencies for new packages are ignored iff
Thanks for the explanation. (BTW, it was a typo in my original
message; I had meant to say that the version in _sid_ was 0.9.1-3.)
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:58:12PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Urgencies for new packages are ignored iff they are "higher" than
> the default urgency configured
On 2014-01-02 17:01, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:58:12PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Urgencies for new packages are ignored iff they are "higher" than
the default urgency configured in britney. The default was recently
changed to "medium", meaning that a high or critical ur
On 2014-01-02 16:30, Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2014-01-02 16:55 +0100, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
[...]
Too young, only 0 of 5 days old
Ignoring high urgency setting for NEW package
[...]
Packages not in testing are new by definition, and urgency settings
are
ignored for them. So xzgv will hav
On 2014-01-02 16:55 +0100, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> For the debian.qa.debian.org page[1], it states:
>
> excuses:
>Too young, only 0 of 5 days old
>Ignoring high urgency setting for NEW package
>Not considered
>
> [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xzgv.html
>
> What's confusing me is t
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 10:55:32AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For the debian.qa.debian.org page[1], it states:
>
> excuses:
>Too young, only 0 of 5 days old
>Ignoring high urgency setting for NEW package
>Not considered
>
> [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xzgv.html
>
Hi,
For the debian.qa.debian.org page[1], it states:
excuses:
Too young, only 0 of 5 days old
Ignoring high urgency setting for NEW package
Not considered
[1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xzgv.html
What's confusing me is there is no "high" urgency setting in the Debian
changelog for
10 matches
Mail list logo
