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
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
What's
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 there is
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
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
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 in
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 they
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 medium,
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 calculate
9 matches
Mail list logo
