[gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-12 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates for January. I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to keep the stable tree more up-to-date. I think the best way to proceed

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Sergey Popov
13.01.2013 02:49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > # pinkbyte > app-shells/ccsh-0.0.4-r3 > app-shells/rrs-1.70-r1 > dev-libs/jthread-1.3.1 Ok for them > # netmon > dev-libs/geoip-1.4.8-r2 Ok for it And thank

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 02:49:52PM -0800, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > # robbat2 > app-admin/diradm-2.9.7.1 +1 > # robbat2 > app-shells/localshell-1.3.4 +1 > # netmon > dev-libs/geoip-1.4.8-r2 +0.5 looking for another vote > # base-system > sys-apps/irqbalance-1.0.5 +1 > # base-system > sys-ap

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/01/2013 20:05, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> > sys-libs/freeipmi-1.2.3-r1 > +0.5 I'd really prefer to see 1.2.2 or 1.2.3 stable first, given the history with FreeIPMI, I don't aim for too many stable candidates... -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeye

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Markos Chandras
On 12 January 2013 22:49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the > same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to > keep

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:49 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > I think the best way to proceed is to listen to that feedback and > continue the effort, while also keeping an updated list of exclusions > for packagers/herds that are actively stabilized by maintainers. I filed dev-python/paramiko-1

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Panagiotis Christopoulos
On 14:49 Sat 12 Jan , "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the > same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to > keep

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-15 Thread Mike Pagano
13.01.2013 02:49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >Please review attached automatically generated stabilizatiocandidates >for January. > > # mpagano kernel-misc sys-kernel/linux-docs-3.6. I'll do this for the just committed version linux-docs-3.6.11. What I will do for now on is change our stabiliza

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-16 Thread Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/12/2013 05:49 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the > same time I also received lots of

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-16 Thread Michael Weber
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 01/12/2013 11:49 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization > candidates for January. cool > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at > the same time I also received lot

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-16 Thread Matt Turner
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: > net-wireless/b43-fwcutter-017 > > be my guest, although I prefer the bugs personally. That's what he's doing... asking maintainers if it's okay to open stabilization bugs for their packages.

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-16 Thread Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/16/2013 01:09 PM, Matt Turner wrote: honestly this list is such a tinderbox that I hardly read it. I actually missed the email at first and had to go back in the thread when I saw a lot of responses. Hence, I would prefer to get bugs than random

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-16 Thread Matt Turner
> honestly this list is such a tinderbox that I hardly read it. I actually > missed the email at first and had to go back in the thread when I saw a > lot of responses. Hence, I would prefer to get bugs than random emails > that I have to search through. So ignore it and he'll open bugs just the s

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-17 Thread Thomas Beierlein
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 14:49:52 -0800 ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization > candidates for January. > # tomjbe media-libs/hamlib-1.2.15.3 media-radio/tlf-1.1.5 media-radio/xastir-2.0.4 are good to go. I put stable requests in bugzi already.

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-21 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne So 12. ledna 2013 14:49:52, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. napsal(a): > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the > same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-22 Thread Mike Pagano
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 07:14:12 PM Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Dne So 12. ledna 2013 14:49:52, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. napsal(a): > > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > > for January. > > > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-22 Thread Petteri Räty
On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. > > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the > same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to > keep the sta

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-22 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2013/1/22 Petteri Räty : > > I have an RSS feed for this purpose at: > > http://gentoo.petteriraty.eu/stable.rss > > Sources are available here: > > https://github.com/betelgeuse/scripts/blob/master/rss-changelog > > Maybe this is something that should be pushed to official Gentoo > infrastructure

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-01-22 Thread Theo Chatzimichos
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates >> for January. >> >> I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the >> same time I also received

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-02-10 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
On 1/12/13 11:49 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates > for January. Oops, today I've tried my _separate_ script to file stabilization bugs based on a generated list of packages to support that workflow. Now the bug is that the l

Re: [gentoo-dev] January stabilization candidates

2013-02-10 Thread Ralph Sennhauser
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 12:22:13 +0100 ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > I can actually batch invalidate all of them. This will generate some > further bug spam (I apologize), but can save your time dealing with > the mess. Please let me know what's your preference. The URL field is likely not filled o