On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 01:27:17AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The right way of dealing with that is to work with the potential
> contributor to ensure they understand the issues that're involved so
> that their future contributions can be accepted and will be useful.
This is a very important se
Le vendredi 16 février 2007 à 01:27 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> (If there's something more than the general comments Frank made,
> I'm still not seeing it. TTBOMK, the non-free and experimental builds
> aren't at all integrated with the buildd.d.o stuff, and there's been
> no particular intere
Anthony Towns wrote:
> I've been thinking for a few days now that people in Debian disagree
> too much (hence the comments preceding my responses to Raphael in an
> earlier message), so starting now, I'm going to stop replying to mails
> by focussing on differences, and start with agreements. Let
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 10:00:25AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> >> > > i think someone running more than one autobuilder for more than _two_
> >> > > years now (okay, not for the officical archive, but i see that as
> >> > > nonrelevant here) demonstrats very good that he mets your mentioned
> >> >
Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:16:56PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>>> There are additional problems with running a rogue autobuilder, such as
>>> unavailability of build logs, unreproducibility of builds, and unusability
>>> of the builds by the security team. Aurelian's bu
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:16:56PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > There are additional problems with running a rogue autobuilder, such as
> > unavailability of build logs, unreproducibility of builds, and unusability
> > of the builds by the security team. Aurelian's buildds had the additional
>
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 08:37:27AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> On Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 13:13:36 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > -vote dropped
>
> And readded apparently. Do we really have to have these conversations
> across multiple lists?
>
>> > > i think someone
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 08:37:27AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> On Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 13:13:36 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > -vote dropped
And readded apparently. Do we really have to have these conversations
across multiple lists?
> > > i think someone running more than one autobuilder
Hi,
On Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 13:13:36 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> -vote dropped
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:06:01PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > > Maintaining a buildd isn't trivial, there's:
> > >
> > > - making sure they don't get rooted, and their builds compromised
> > >
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:34:38PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > On Wednesday 14 February 2007 20:21, Marc Haber wrote:
>> >> Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
>> >> maximum
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:34:38PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 14 February 2007 20:21, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
> >> maximum effect.
> > Do you really think constant sensele
Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Wednesday 14 February 2007 20:21, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
>> maximum effect.
>
> Do you really think constant senseless contentless ranting has _any_ (good)
> effect?
It rem
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:12:19PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 February 2007 20:21, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
> > maximum effect.
>
> Do you really think constant senseless contentless ranting has _any_ (good)
> effe
Hi Marc,
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 20:21, Marc Haber wrote:
> Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
> maximum effect.
Do you really think constant senseless contentless ranting has _any_ (good)
effect?
regards,
Holger
pgpgXAsXBPwUQ.pgp
Description: PG
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 06:42:19PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> So where can I send my application so that I can help out with this
> stuff? I think I know how to do all of the listed things.
Judging from broad knowledge, you might send them to /dev/null for
maximum effect.
Greetings
Ma
Anthony Towns writes:
> Maintaining a buildd isn't trivial, there's:
>
> - making sure they don't get rooted, and their builds compromised
> - keeping the chroot up to date
> - keeping in sync with w-b / sbuild changes
> - keeping in sync with the infrastructure upstream (building
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 09:15:17PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I've still not seen Aurelian or the folks so upset with this acknowledge
> any problems with what he's done, or any similar indication that they've
> learnt from it and won't just do the same thing again. And I've seen
> lots of flipp
Hi,
> Maintaining a buildd isn't trivial, there's:
>
> - making sure they don't get rooted, and their builds compromised
> - keeping the chroot up to date
> - keeping in sync with w-b / sbuild changes
> - keeping in sync with the infrastructure upstream (building from
> incoming
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:16:56PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 09:15:17PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:12:31PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > Then you don't see any conflict of interest between the arm buildd admin
> > > and the ftp-maste
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 09:15:17PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:12:31PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Then you don't see any conflict of interest between the arm buildd admin
> > and the ftp-master?
>
> No, I don't. I don't see any conflict of interest in being a pac
[moving this to a more appropriate list]
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:12:31PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:33:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:11:55PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:12:31PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:33:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:11:55PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:00:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 0
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 07:12:31PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:33:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:11:55PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > Right, you could change dak. You can't/won't/? fix the process by which
> > > the current restri
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:33:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:11:55PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:00:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:35:07PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > > > Uh, what's this if not
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:11:55PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:00:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:35:07PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > > Uh, what's this if not peer review?
> > > It's not peer review when we discuss it later and no
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:00:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:35:07PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > Uh, what's this if not peer review?
> > It's not peer review when we discuss it later and none of us (including
> > you) have any power to do anything about it, exc
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:45:06AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
> > >> > I don't imagine Aurelien's any less upset, but as far as I can see,
> > >> > there
> > >> > aren't actual problems with the way arm's keeping up at present:
> > >>
> > >> Another problem is that the bui
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 02:18:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:36AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > This is a two-way street though. Aurelien was trying to solve a problem
> > he perceived to exist with the arm port. His solution has been rejected,
> > but is the or
Frank Küster wrote:
> >> > I don't imagine Aurelien's any less upset, but as far as I can see, there
> >> > aren't actual problems with the way arm's keeping up at present:
> >>
> >> Another problem is that the buildd email mailbox is apparently piped to
> >> /dev/null.
> >
> > FWIW, buildd mail i
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> > ] I am really upset by the way the ARM build daemons are managed. The
>> > ] packages are not uploaded regularly, with sometimes three days between
>> > ] two uploads. [...]
>> > ]
>> > ] All of that resulted in ARM being the s
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > ] I am really upset by the way the ARM build daemons are managed. The
> > ] packages are not uploaded regularly, with sometimes three days between
> > ] two uploads. [...]
> > ]
> > ] All of that resulted in ARM being the slowest architecture to build
> > ] packages. [...]
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 06:35:07PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Uh, what's this if not peer review?
> It's not peer review when we discuss it later and none of us (including
> you) have any power to do anything about it, except via long drawn-out
> political processes.
Err, I could change it r
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 02:18:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:36AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > This is a two-way street though. Aurelien was trying to solve a problem
> > he perceived to exist with the arm port. His solution has been rejected,
> > but is the or
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 07:56:36AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> This is a two-way street though. Aurelien was trying to solve a problem
> he perceived to exist with the arm port. His solution has been rejected,
> but is the original problem being addressed?
] I am really upset by the way the ARM
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 07:35:49PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:15:51AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > > Considering any DD has the ability to introduce any kind of malware
> > > and/or kill (almost) any debian.org server, yes, a little bit of trust
> > > would
Le lundi 12 février 2007 à 19:35 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> > There are different levels of trusting. One can think that no DD
> > would introduce malware in the archive and anyway could think also that
> > some
> > developers are not good for certain tasks because of attitude/lack of
> >
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:15:51AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > Considering any DD has the ability to introduce any kind of malware
> > and/or kill (almost) any debian.org server, yes, a little bit of trust
> > would be a minimum.
> There are different levels of trusting. One can think
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:38:42PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:59:41PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The context doesn't make the above quote any more pleasant.
> >
> > Well, in an ideal world ever
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> May I suggest you start using a MUA with threading support? It should
> provide access to the original source easily.
If you had checked the mail headers you would have noticed that I do
use such a MUA. What I don't do is store the Debian mailing list
Le dimanche 11 février 2007 à 04:24 +0200, Kalle Kivimaa a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
> >> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,
>
> Quoting partial sentences without d
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:59:41PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The context doesn't make the above quote any more pleasant.
>
> Well, in an ideal world everybody trusts everybody, but unfortunately
> the world we live in is not i
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The context doesn't make the above quote any more pleasant.
Well, in an ideal world everybody trusts everybody, but unfortunately
the world we live in is not ideal. And I'm not sure what's so
newsworthy in the fact that one developer doesn't trust anoth
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 11:47:28AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 04:24:45AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
> > >> effort from Aurelian and friends
Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 04:24:45AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
> > >> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,
> >
>
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 04:24:45AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
> >> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,
>
> Quoting partial sentences without discl
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
>> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,
Quoting partial sentences without disclosing the original source is
what usually only the yellow press does. I d
e samedi 10 février 2007 à 13:05 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' W
47 matches
Mail list logo
