Arnaud:
> Hi,
>
>> In order to get Tails builds reproducible, we had to refactor the way we
>> use vagrant in our build system [1]. Under the hood, a lot of our build
>> scripts have changed, but for most use cases the transition should be
>> transparent.
>
> I have made some very minor cosmetic
Vasiliy Kaygorodov:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:20 PM, anonym <ano...@riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Might I instead suggest that you add vmdebootstrap to your PATH, i.e.:
>>
>> export PATH="${PATH}:${HOME}/ve/tails/bin"
>>
>> so y
Vasiliy Kaygorodov:
> Edit vagrant/definitions/tails-builder/generate-tails-builder-box.sh and:
> - modify "vmdeboostrap" line with the full path to vmdeboostrap installed
> in virtualenv, e.g.: ${HOME}/ve/tails/bin/vmdeboostrap
Might I instead suggest that you add vmdebootstrap to your PATH,
intrigeri:
> anonym:
>> In addition, here are steps to clean up the old build environment as a one
>> time step:
>
> Thanks!
>
>> vagrant box list | \
>> grep -o "tails-builder-amd64-jessie-[0-9]\{8\}\>" | \
>>
bertagaz:
> We released today all this changes, so for developers that are building
> Tails, we strongly advise to have a look at the build documentation
> [2] and adapt your usage.
In addition, here are steps to clean up the old build environment as a one time
step:
vagrant box list | \
uld drop it :)
>
> It's actually very simple: everything is mirrored.
>
> We still tell mirror operators that they can exclude the "obsolete"
> directory if they wish, but we've deleted it on our side months ago,
> so I'm going to drop these bits from the doc.
Ah, simp
both the n-1 and n ISOS will be on the mirrors,
so that should be more like 4 GiB.
> So that's 12.6 GiB.
Finally, this number doesn't take into account the project/vagrant directory
which currently is at 2 GiB, but OTOH we will soon be able to remove it, so
let's ignore it.
> W
Arnaud:
> On 04/22/2017 06:16 PM, anonym wrote:
>> If the fix I proposed above isn't good enough for you, I suggest
>> you wait and return to this issue in a few months -- there's an
>> ongoing rework of how we use Vagrant which moves in the direction
>>
Arnaud:
> Dear Tails,
>
> I'd like to propose a little improvement to the Tails Builder VM.
>
> My use-case is that I build Tails locally on my laptop. My concern is a
> little lack of convenience: if ever I forget to close the Tails Builder
> VM (using `rake vm:halt`) after I'm done, the laptop
Hi,
Using the code snippet in our release process, these are the tickets referenced
in wiki/src/{doc,support} that are resolved:
It seems ticket #5563 has been fixed (Status: Resolved) so please find all
instances in the wiki and fix them. Ticket URL:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/5563
Hi,
During mine and intrigeri's upcoming Stretch sprint we plan to build and upload
Tails 3.0~rc1 on 2017-05-19 and release it on 2017-05-20. Testers, please let
me and intrigeri know:
* if you are available on 2017-05-19, late CEST
* if you are available on 2017-05-20, morning to afternoon,
Georg Koppen:
> Georg Koppen:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> Tor Browser 6.5.2 is ready for testing. Bundles can be found on:
>>
>> https://people.torproject.org/~gk/builds/6.5.2-build1/
>
> For what it is worth we are currently doing a -build3 which we think
> will be the final one. It should not affect Tails
Patrick Schleizer:
> Hi,
>
> could you please add this trivial fix?
>
> https://github.com/Whonix/control-port-filter-python/commit/30c1de54f9feaa26464842241e217be6edf3b464
I found your onion-grater repo, but it is not based on the upstream repo, has a
different directory layout full of
Hi!
The next Firefox release has been bumped one day into the future [1] => the
next TBB release has been bumped one day into the future => Tails 2.12 is
bumped one day into the future, i.e. release on 2017-04-18.
Here's the release schedule:
* 2017-04-18:
- All branches targeting Tails
xin:
> Hello, I found a syntax error in the last news, please review and merge.
>
> Repo: https://git-tails.immerda.ch/xin/tails/
> Branch: fixsyntaxerror
> Last Commit: aee2d51568c55c4dfa415efc8a8ac59d46bfb8ba
Applied, thanks!
Cheers!
___
Tails-dev
Meta: you posted to the wrong list since this isn't user support. When replying
to this email, please drop tails-support@ from Cc so the discussion can
continue on tails-dev@ only!
james.fannon:
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently doing a research project into the usage of TAILS, as part of my
>
Arnaud:
>
>
> On 04/04/2017 12:45 PM, anonym wrote:
>> I don't know what you mean with "Tor download" -- the build system itself
>> doesn't run or use tor.
>
> I was talking about the tor browser that is downloaded in
> `config/chroot_local-hooks/10-t
Arnaud:
> On 04/04/2017 11:49 AM, anonym wrote:
>>> So at the moment, I'm still in this situation where build fails, and I
>>> retry and retry until at some point it succeeds. I didn't have much time
>>> to work on that yet. I'll come back to you when I work
Arnaud:
> While these patches don't hurt, I can tell you now that they solve
> nothing. And I don't want to be responsible for cluttering the build
> system with useless stuff like that ;)
Thanks! :)
> So at the moment, I'm still in this situation where build fails, and I
> retry and retry until
intrigeri:
> Hi Justin,
>
> Justin:
>> A wile ago, I sent an email to this list to see if the Tor bridges screen
>> could be
>> made accessible to Orca users, by using the same method that made Onion
>> Circuits
>> work.
>
> Right. I believe my previous reply still applies:
>
Arnaud:
> anonym:
>> Let me add one, which is a special case of intrigeri's last point:
>>
>> * start Tails and "symlink" the relevant/changed files from your Tails
>> source tree into the correct places in the filesystem of a running Tails
>>
Austin English:
> Hi all,
>
> It's been a while since I've built tails, been busy with other
> projects.. Anyway, I've done a git pull, git clean -fxd (to clear out
> .vagrant), and removed ~/.vagrant.d. I then tried to build with noram,
> since my laptop is low on free memory, and I get:
>
>
u:
> Hi,
>
> anonym:
>> Alexandre Trottier:
>>> Sounds good I'll start reading
>>
>> I have written the specific requirements here:
>> https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/12264
>>
>> Note that what we need in Tails doesn't include Debian pack
Alexandre Trottier:
> Sounds good I'll start reading
I have written the specific requirements here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/12264
Note that what we need in Tails doesn't include Debian packaging, although
someone taking over that part from zzz (the I2P Project Manager, who is not
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.12, which is a major release scheduled
on 2017-04-18. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.12 can be found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=238
Below you'll find the preliminary release schedule for Tails 2.12:
Arnaud:
> intrigeri:
>> I personally combine two approaches, depending on the need:
>>
>> * build a modified ISO image
>> * start Tails and modify files in there (it *is* writable, but of course
>> the modifications go to a ramdisk)
Let me add one, which is a special case of intrigeri's last
Arnaud:
> --- a/vagrant/provision/setup-tails-builder
> +++ b/vagrant/provision/setup-tails-builder
[...]
> +# Configure apt to retry
> +echo 'APT::Acquire::Retries "20";' > /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/99retries
This will only affect provisioning, not any usage of APT during the build,
right? Or will it
segfault:
> Arnaud:
>> The failure doesn't always happen at the same point of the build. At
>> first, I thought it was related to `apt`, but I also experienced in
>> failure on a `curl` command (when downloading Tor Browser, in
>> `config/chroot_local-hooks/10-tbb`). I don't have the log anymore,
[I'm cross-posting to all these lists since that's where the meeting reminders
go, but whoever responds to this can perhaps drop all but tails-project@ so we
focus the discussion on one list.]
sajolida:
> The next Tails contributors meeting is scheduled for:
>
> Friday 03 March
At least
sajolida:
> The next Tails contributors meeting is scheduled for:
>
> Friday 03 March
As usual for Fri-Sun, don't count on me.
Cheers!
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.11, which is a point release scheduled
on 2017-03-07. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.11 can be found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=237
Here's the release schedule:
* 2017-03-06:
- All branches
Patrick Schleizer:
> Patch by Joy. Otherwise it does not work for us. Do you think you could
> merge this patch?
No; the "match-"-prefix was intentionally dropped, so please `s/match-//g` in
all your scripts and filter files.
Cheers!
___
Tails-dev
Mark Smith:
> On 1/10/17 5:27 AM, anonym wrote:
>> Michael Carbone:
>>> The move away from XUL could be an opportunity to address this by
>>> building a more generic solution that could be used by the increasing
>>> number of tor-powered applications/environmen
anonym:
> Mark Smith:
>> I don't expect WebExtensions to support a standalone app mode, although
>> for your purposes it might be acceptable to start the browser with
>> TOR_CONFIGURE_ONLY=1. I guess there are some differences in terms of how
>> much Firefox code
Michael English:
> Anonym,
>
>> Of course, mine too (and intrigeri's, I'm sure :)). Sorry for
>> frustrating you like this about something that is obvious for you,
>> but it indeed gets hard for us when we need to consider things we
>> have little or no clue about.
Michael English:
> Anonym,
>
> Please Cc me with any replies. For some reason, I am unable to subscribe to
> the list.
Got it!
> Anonym:
>> Note that I haven't chimed in with my opinion yet. :) I think intrigeri
>> is just careful: privacy feature
Patrick Schleizer:
> Hello anonym!
>
> anonym:
>> Feel free to send a PR with your other
>> changes applied to tor-controlport-filter in Tails Git!
>> Otherwise
>> I'll do it myself later this week.
>
> Joy rebased Whonix's changes on top of you
Michael English:
>> Anyway: I personally don't feel responsible for maintaining the
>> Electrum integration in Tails, would rather not to become more
>> involved into it, and will therefore let its maintainer (i.e. anonym)
>> make the call. But I'm genuinely curious a
Patrick Schleizer:
> anonym:
>> Patrick Schleizer:
>>> [override] will probably work for Whonix. Joy and me drafted a
>>> plan.
>>>
>>> In one sentence: We at Whonix invent a new a separate config
>>> folder, parse it with a yml merger pyth
anonym:
> Feel free to send a PR with your other changes applied to
> tor-controlport-filter in Tails Git! Otherwise I'll do it myself
> later this week.
Done in Tails' branch: feature/12173-end-whonix-controlport-filter-fork
I also opened https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/12173
Mark Smith:
> On 1/10/17 5:18 AM, anonym wrote:
>> In Tails we run Tor Launcher as a stand-alone XUL application. Last I
>> checked it was not clear whether this would still be supported by
>> Firefox + WebExtensions. Do you know anything more about this?
>
> Unfortunat
Patrick Schleizer:
> Hi!
>
> [override] will probably work for Whonix. Joy and me drafted a plan.
>
> In one sentence: We at Whonix invent a new a separate config folder,
> parse it with a yml merger python script, and generate another yml file
> that gets passed to tor-controlport-filter by
Patrick Schleizer:
> anonym:
>> Yay! Let's try to make this fork short-lived!
>
> Yes! :)
>
>> Note that Tails' version has changed quite a lot since you forked --
> please try to keep your fork delta minimal (i.e. only do what *must* be
> done)!
>
> Our dif
Patrick Schleizer:
> Whonix has forked tor-controlport-filter by Tails.
>
> https://github.com/Whonix/control-port-filter-python
>
> Whonix is using a different configuration parser.
Yay! Let's try to make this fork short-lived! Note that Tails' version has
changed quite a lot since you forked
TARIQ ADAMS:
> I visited tails.boum.org and noticed that in the call for testing, the RC
> version number is 2.10. The first thought was that it was a typo for (3.10)
> and
> others would surely have mentioned it somewhere in the git repository.
Note that "RC" == "Release candidate". So 2.10~rc1
Hi,
The Vagrant basebox has been updated, and apparently Vagrant won't
switch to it automatically. To completely delete the old builder VM and
basebox, please run these commands from Tails' Git root:
rake vm:halt
rake vm:destroy
vagrant box remove tails-builder-amd64-jessie-20160226
Michael Carbone:
> The move away from XUL could be an opportunity to address this by
> building a more generic solution that could be used by the increasing
> number of tor-powered applications/environments, such as onionshare,
> ricochet, tails, qubes, subgraph, etc., in addition to tor browser
Georg Koppen:
> Patrick Schleizer:
>> Hi,
>>
>> XPCOM / XUL based add-ons will be deprecated in Firefox. [1]
>>
>> I've searched trac, mailing list, irc logs... I know you are aware of
>> that, but haven't found your plan forward. Is there already one?
>>
>> What are your plans regarding
GoodCrypto Support:
> We realize how difficult it is to get feedback from our own users so we
> decided that it was important that we share our experience contributing
> to Tails.
Thank you!
> We love Tails and were eager to contribute. When the call for help with
> ticket 11198 was posted to
Dash Press:
> are you guys working on Dash integration ?
It was proposed ~a year ago
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9456
but it was rejected since there was no client packaged in Debian at the
time. Feel free to update the ticket if things have changed.
In addition to that, the crypto
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.10, which is a major release
scheduled on 2017-01-24. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.10 can be
found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=235
Below you'll find the preliminary release schedule for Tails 2.10:
*
AtomiKe:
> Hello,
> The wiki wasn't building. It should be fixed in
> 0fa2851483e791666459129ccd8902d4291eb32c thanks to spriver.
> Repo: https://gitlab.com/AtomiKe/tails
> Branch: fix-wiki
Applied, thanks!
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.9 (just like I was gonna be for
the cancelled Tails 2.8 [0]), which is a point release scheduled on
2016-12-13. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.9 can be found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=217
Yes, all
Hi!
We have decided to downgrade the next release from a major release to a
point release, which according to our versioning scheme means we cancel
2.8 and release 2.9 instead. In practice, for most of you this just
means that there will be no release candidate on 2016-12-01.
The reasons for
Damian Johnson:
> Hi Patrick. Not sure I follow - a control port filter acts as a proxy...
>
> Application => Filter => Tor Control Port
Exactly.
> If the filter is shut down the socket the application is connected to
> is... well, gone. Is the trouble that Onionshare gives a poor
> indication
Patrick Schleizer:
> anonym:
>> Patrick Schleizer:
>>> Where I need to correct myself. The injected IP is probably difficult to
>>> add to a config file since IPs in Qubes will remain dynamic for some
>>> quite some time until Qubes 4.0. We'd need someth
that). If there's some silly syntax error, I bet you can fix it
yourself. :)
Cheers!
From 66befb6a44fcdb1c8afccf0346de0007bd52ecd3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: anonym <ano...@riseup.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 20:46:29 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] tor-controlport-filter: add "special" re
Patrick Schleizer:
> That crashes the filter for me.
Argh, I meant:
GETINFO:
- pattern: 'net/listeners/socks'
response:
- pattern: '250-net/listeners/socks=".*"'
replacement: '250-net/listeners/socks="127.0.0.1:9150"'
(Notice the removed "-" in front of
intrigeri:
> anonym:
>> IMHO those of us with access to jenkins should also make sure to
>> check the tests before asking for a review. Clearly I failed at that
>> this time (but I have done it at other times, so it was just a slip!),
>> so the blame is on me, reall
Patrick Schleizer:
> anonym:
>> https://tails.boum.org/news/report_2016_09/#index2h1
>>
>> and look at the documentation at the top of the script, and the filter
>> rules we ship to get an idea of what it can do.
>
>> As you can see, in Tails we use m
Patrick Schleizer:
>>> - https://phabricator.whonix.org/T564
>>
>> I'd need more details of what the idea is here.
>
> Prevent (in case of some bug or compromise) that more than X hidden
> services are created. The number of hidden service should be tracked. If
> more than X are created, requests
Patrick Schleizer:
> Hi there,
>
> sorry for the delay, I got side tracked with other stuff.
>
> My first and summary impression is, that this is looking excellent!
\o/
> ./tor-controlport-filter --listen-address 9052
> Tor control port filter started, listening on 9052:9051
>
> Do you see
intrigeri:
> Hi!
>
> Recently a branch was merged, that introduced a regression in our test
> suite, which Jenkins was able to spot. But for some reason, we noticed
> that regression only *after* the branch was merged into stable & devel.
>
> I think that one of the key features of our test
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.8, which is a major release
scheduled on 2016-12-13. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.8 can be
found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=217
Below you'll find the preliminary release schedule for Tails 2.8. I
controlport-filter
* config/chroot_local-includes/etc/tor-controlport-filter.d/
> Thanks anonym, for all your work on tails control port filter and
> replies. Very exciting developments! I am preparing responses and will
> test it soonish.
Yay! Pe
Patrick Schleizer:
> Hi,
>
> as discussed elsewhere, yes, it would be great if we could share code bases!
Agreed, but we have to realize that at the moment Whonix and Tails run
these filters in quite different contexts and under different threat
models. Whonix runs the filter in a different VM
Sukhbir Singh:
> In case you missed it, we just released Tor Messenger 0.2.0b2, the first
> release with the secure updater.
>
> https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-messenger-020b2-released
>
> One of the long-terms goals when we started was to replace Pidgin with Tor
> Messenger as the
u:
> Hi,
>
> Justin:
>> Hi, 15 days ago, ticket 7500 was updated. The target year was 2017,
>> but this was removed. What does this mean? Are we any closer to
>> having a greeter that can be used with Orca?
>
> No, that simply means that we removed this from the roadmap for 2017.
Random User:
> Hi,
>
> Late last week ( no later than 17 September) my Tor Browser updated
> itself (after prompting me) to 6.0.5. Yet, the changelog (
> /tor-browser_en-US/Browser/TorBrowser/Docs/ChangeLog.txt ) gives the
> release date as September 20th (future date).
>
> Likewise, a
sycamore one:
>> * if you are available on 2016-09-13, morning to afternoon, CEST.
>
> Not sure yet.
Note that Tails 2.6 has been delayed until 2016-09-20. See the updated
release schedule posted on tails-dev@.
Cheers!
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Hi,
The Tails 2.6 feature freeze and translation window has started!
Translations must be in by 2016-09-12 (noon CEST), and should be based
on the 'testing' branch in Tails' main Git repository.
Here's the list of changes:
wiki/src/doc/about/license.mdwn| 10 +++
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.6, which is a major release
scheduled on 2016-09-13. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.6 can be
found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=215
So, yeah, this is a very late date to send the schedule given that the
[Dropping tor-qa@ since what I am about to say only concerns Tails.]
We are skipping this Tor Browser upgrade for Tails because none of the
bugs fixed in this release are very relevant for us. Here's a run-down
of the specific Tor bugs fixed that we'll miss out on:
19348: Not relevant for Tails
segfault:
> I just noticed that actually I do not parse the config files every time
> I need an option value. I only read the value the first time I need it
> and then store it in a variable. I do write to the config files
> everytime the value is set though.
> I can test later how much the
segfault:
> anonym:
>> segfault:
>>> anonym:
>>>> segfault:
>>>>> anonym:
>>>> [...]
>>>> However, if possible, let's try an approach that doesn't rely on this,
>>>> ok? But I still guess you'd like to have this f
Christian Medel:
> and when do you expect to make effective?
Spencer was joking -- there has been no progress on this at all since we
last talked. In fact, I am still waiting on your input here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/10830#note-4
So, if you are still interested on working on
segfault:
> anonym:
>> segfault:
>>> anonym:
>>>> segfault:
>> [...]
>>>>> I wrote some code to make single files persistent by creating a new
>>>>> directory in TailsData_unlocked, moving the file into it and adding the
segfault:
> sajolida:
>> anonym:
>>> # add_onion
>>>
>>> By using stem to communicate with Tor over the control port/socket to
>>> add the hidden services, just like onionshare does (which would be a
>>> good source for inspiration, code-wis
segfault:
> anonym:
>> [...]
>> One thing to note about the mumble-server script is the "little
>> bind-mount trick" used to workaround Tor's AppArmor confinement. We
>> won't have that problem, I think. I did that so that all things we want
>>
xin:
> xin:
>> Hello, I made a branch to remove a problem solved in 2.4.
>>
>> Repo : https://git-tails.immerda.ch/xin/tails/
>> Branch : update/knownissues
>> Last Commit : a0660da5b2b328b25467dd7a7ded035c7d3abeb1
>>
>> Cheers.
>> xin
&g
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.4, which is a major release
scheduled on 2016-06-06. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.4 can be
found here:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=193
Here's the preliminary release schedule for Tails 2.4:
* 2016-05-25:
anonym:
> pr0ng:
>> I believe I've repackaged the 0.9.25 to 'conform' to the Tails layout
>> correctly and will be rebuilding the Tails dev branch with 0.9.25
>> over the next couple of days when I get another block of time, likely
>> mid-week ~ 20, 21st?
>>
pr0ng:
>
> Hi Tails!
>
>>> We have named pr0ng the new maintainer for I2P in Tails.
>>> Pr0ng has I2P, Tails, and some Debian packaging knowledge,
>
> pr0ng here. I was last contacted via zzz(@i2p) who forwarded me the
> mail from anonym. Nice to be abo
Hi,
Due to Mozilla delaying the Firefox releases by a week, the next Tor
Browser and (hence) Tails releases will be delayed as well. So, the new
release date for Tails 2.3 is 2016-04-26. Below I'll post an updated
schedule and testing dates:
Here's the preliminary release schedule for Tails 2.3:
Hi,
[Meta: sorry for sending this late! OTOH, it's so formulaic, that any
one paying attention probably could have guessed the schedule below. :)]
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.3, which is a minor release
scheduled for 2016-04-19. The list of tickets targeting Tails 2.3 can be
found
Andrew Gallagher:
> On 23/03/16 18:30, sajolida wrote:
>>
>> You can use the "link" type in persistence.conf. I've done similar
>> things already while playing with #10543.
>
> Could you point to a doc/howto for doing that? It might save me some
> grief in something else I'm playing with...
anonym:
> segfault:
>>> - We know have a script to run a Mumble server from Tails [4] and are
>>> considering adding it to Tails [5].
>>>
>>> [4]: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9993
>>> [5]: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/11241
>>
segfault:
>> - The integration of OnionShare is moving forward [2] with some patches
>> proposed to our tor-controlport-filter to support creating ephemeral
>> onion services.
>>
>> [2]: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7870#note-15
> I took note of this, but as I understand it, this will only
intrigeri:
> Hi,
>
> anonym wrote (10 Mar 2016 20:06:31 GMT) :
>>> Upgrading to a new snapshot
>
>> I expect it to be quite rare that we need to encode a particular
>> snapshot in a topic branch, which is both good and bad. Good, because we
>> then do no
sajolida:
> freedom-m...@sigaint.org:
>> There is any chance of Tails OS see other version that looks like the 1.6?
>> The 2.2 version is UGLY AS HELL.
>
> I agree :)
>
> We switched to GNOME Shell in Classic mode (with the grey menus) because
> we wanted to continue providing the top-left
Hi,
I would like everyone to take a careful look at their own Redmine view,
grouped and ordered by Target version:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=128
Tails 2.2 was released a week ago, but there are still 48 tickets
targeting it. Please take care of those that
Nan:
> Hi!
Hey!
> We'd like to help convert Tails bash scripts to python. We've done
> that a lot with GoodCrypto.
Great! We're looking forward to your pull requests. :)
Please let us know if there is anything else you need for starting not
covered in our general coding contribution guidelines
intrigeri:
> I hereby propose that we:
I fully ack your conclusions and plan.
Cheers!
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to
intrigeri:
> We need input from people who are into release management
I am! :)
First off, awesome work, intrigeri and kibi! I'm really looking forward
to the time when this is available. We have such grand ideas based on it!
I have read through the topic branch's changes to the release steps,
Austin English:
> On 02/22/2016 07:02 AM, intrigeri wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> anonym just merged the branch for #9262 aka. "Port our ISO build
>> system to Jessie", so if you have an ISO build setup, you need to
>> upgrade it:
>>
>> *
Hi,
Me and intrigeri have deviced a plan for how we will deal with
the migration to Debian Stretch, with the details being available
in this blueprint:
https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/Debian_Stretch/
In short, we do not want to repeat the way we did Jessie
migration -- we think we can do
Hi,
I'll be the release manager for Tails 2.2, which is a major release
scheduled for 2016-03-08. Note that there will be no Tails 2.1; for the
curious I suggest reading up on our versioning scheme:
https://tails.boum.org/contribute/release_schedule/#index4h1
The list of tickets targeting Tails
Hi,
Ah, it's that time of the release cycle again! I would like everyone to
take a careful look at their own Redmine view, grouped and ordered by
Target version:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=128
At the time of writing, there are 82 open tickets still targeting
Christian Medel:
> Hi @anonym
> yes, I'm Elbullazul from riseuplabs
>
> I'll see the info from integri (hadn't had any time yet) and then I'll head
> over to the thread you just pointed to continue the discussion.
I think you should read what I'm proposing on the tick
Christian Medel:
> Hi,
>
> Due to the lack of time of the "original" developers, I have come with the
> idea of maybe trying to create code to include the camouflage, hopefully in
> 2.0.
Awesome! And sorry for sort of dropping the ball in our previous
attempt. :/ Any way, time is short for Tails
101 - 200 of 891 matches
Mail list logo
