On 2012-10-30 16:52, Bart Martens wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:11:16AM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
On 2012-10-13 15:36, Bart Martens wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for
Hi,
On 2012-10-13 15:36, Bart Martens wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
Do you have an example of where this goes wrong ?
Sorry I did not
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
reopen 690384
Bug #690384 {Done: Bart Martens ba...@debian.org} [qa.debian.org] DEHS:
ignore epoch when considering new upstream releases
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #690384 to the same values
previously set
reopen 690384
stop
I think that this is an example :
http://packages.qa.debian.org/z/zodb.html
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?packages=zodb
http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/watch?pkg=zodb_1%3A3.9.7-2
| package: zodb
| debian-uversion: 1:3.9.7
| debian-mangled-uversion: 1:3.9.7
|
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'),
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
Do you have an example of where this goes wrong ?
Regards,
Bart Martens
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
6 matches
Mail list logo
