Sorry, think I've got them all now.
For avidemux and gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg in Mageia 1, it may be sufficient to
borrow the patches from the mplayer update.
For avidemux in Mageia 2, patches will need to be pulled from ffmpeg GIT.
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6427
Le 04/07/2012 01:21, David Walser a écrit :
Sorry, think I've got them all now.
For avidemux and gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg in Mageia 1, it may be sufficient to
borrow the patches from the mplayer update.
For avidemux in Mageia 2, patches will need to be pulled from ffmpeg GIT.
https://bugs.mageia.
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 21:31:50 schreef Guillaume Rousse:
> Le 04/07/2012 01:21, David Walser a écrit :
> > Sorry, think I've got them all now.
> >
> > For avidemux and gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg in Mageia 1, it may be sufficient to
> > borrow the patches from the mplayer update.
> >
> > For avidemux
I spent some time today to help the QA team to manage those pending
security updates. And for the second time in a week, I've been facing
rather unpleasant attitude from someone else from the same team:
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5939
I wonder how we're supposed to work together when
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Le 04/07/2012 01:21, David Walser a écrit :
>> Sorry, think I've got them all now.
>>
>> For avidemux and gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg in Mageia 1, it may be sufficient to
>> borrow the patches from the mplayer update.
>>
>> For avidemux in Mageia 2, patches
On 05/07/12 22:51, nicolas vigier wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
Le 04/07/2012 01:21, David Walser a écrit :
Sorry, think I've got them all now.
For avidemux and gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg in Mageia 1, it may be sufficient to
borrow the patches from the mplayer update.
For av
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012, Claire Robinson wrote:
> These recent attacks are causing even more work for us, which again helps
> nobody, and diverts our attention away from where it is really needed. Also
> I would point out that having to validate the same package several times
> obviously lessens th
On 05/07/12 23:34, nicolas vigier wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012, Claire Robinson wrote:
These recent attacks are causing even more work for us, which again helps
nobody, and diverts our attention away from where it is really needed. Also
I would point out that having to validate the same package s
AL13N a écrit :
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 21:31:50 schreef Guillaume Rousse:
I spent some time today to help the QA team to manage those pending
security updates. And for the second time in a week, I've been facing
rather unpleasant attitude from someone else from the same team:
https://bugs.
Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> So, before any further contribution from my side, I'd like the people in
> charge of security updates to find some internal agreement about what
> kind of help they expect from other people exactly. If that's just to
> push a non-discussable list of changes into spec fi
AL13N wrote:
> this is a good point: "BTW, a missing dependency should not be
> considered a blocking issue as it can be easily fixed by the end user.
> Especially for a security update, as he probably already done it."
>
> also, not sure, but it seems the tester was unawere of perl-CGI-Fast being
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 20:34:08 schreef David Walser:
> AL13N wrote:
> > this is a good point: "BTW, a missing dependency should not be
> > considered a blocking issue as it can be easily fixed by the end user.
> > Especially for a security update, as he probably already done it."
> >
> > also,
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 23:52:39 schreef Claire Robinson:
> On 05/07/12 23:34, nicolas vigier wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Jul 2012, Claire Robinson wrote:
> >> These recent attacks are causing even more work for us, which again helps
> >> nobody, and diverts our attention away from where it is really ne
Am 06.07.2012 08:18, schrieb AL13N:
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 23:52:39 schreef Claire Robinson:
With respect Nicolas, you're not on the receiving end.
[...]
allthough i see badly worded(possibly to look offensive) sentences, i don't
think this is intentional, and more a problem of communication
On 06/07/12 07:56, Oliver Burger wrote:
Am 06.07.2012 08:18, schrieb AL13N:
Op donderdag 5 juli 2012 23:52:39 schreef Claire Robinson:
With respect Nicolas, you're not on the receiving end.
[...]
allthough i see badly worded(possibly to look offensive) sentences, i
don't
think this is intenti
> On 06/07/12 07:56, Oliver Burger wrote:
[...]
> This has nothing to do with being rude.
IIUC, a small bit of it is related in 2 instances (from my pov):
- QA team being ignored in their question
- packager being doubted by QA team
(in some or other forms, both of these can be seen as rude)
f
Le 06/07/2012 13:19, AL13N a écrit :
On 06/07/12 07:56, Oliver Burger wrote:
[...]
This has nothing to do with being rude.
IIUC, a small bit of it is related in 2 instances (from my pov):
- QA team being ignored in their question
- packager being doubted by QA team
(in some or other form
On 06/07/12 12:57, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
Le 06/07/2012 13:19, AL13N a écrit :
On 06/07/12 07:56, Oliver Burger wrote:
[...]
This has nothing to do with being rude.
IIUC, a small bit of it is related in 2 instances (from my pov):
- QA team being ignored in their question
- packager being do
On Fri, 06 Jul 2012, Claire Robinson wrote:
>
> This has nothing to do with being rude.
>
> As I said previously, this is being blown wildly out of proportion. In
> reality it centres around one packager and two bugs. In both these bugs the
> packager expected QA to validate updates where one wa
Le dimanche 8 juillet 2012 13:49:36, nicolas vigier a écrit :
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2012, Claire Robinson wrote:
> > This has nothing to do with being rude.
> >
> > As I said previously, this is being blown wildly out of proportion. In
> > reality it centres around one packager and two bugs. In both th
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 20:34:02 David Walser wrote:
> Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> > So, before any further contribution from my side, I'd like the people in
> > charge of security updates to find some internal agreement about what
> > kind of help they expect from other people exactly. If that's ju
Regards,
Buchan
Buchan please refer here:
https://www.mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/2012-July/017245.html
Thankyou.
Buchan Milne wrote:
> On Thursday, 5 July 2012 20:34:02 David Walser wrote:
>> Guillaume Rousse wrote:
>> > So, before any further contribution from my side, I'd like the people in
>> > charge of security updates to find some internal agreement about what
>> > kind of help they expect from other pe
23 matches
Mail list logo
