On 06/15/2012 11:19 AM, Stéphane Graber wrote:
On 06/15/2012 10:46 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2012 10:28:55 AM Stéphane Graber wrote:
On 06/15/2012 10:12 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
Hello all,
At UDS I had some "hallway discussions" about why we freeze for Alphas
and Betas, an
Excerpts from James Page's message of 2012-06-15 05:57:41 -0700:
> Hi Daniel
>
> On 15/06/12 13:31, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > On 15.06.2012 14:08, James Page wrote:
> >>> SRU's which have been uploaded but not accepted are hard to
> >>> differentiate on the report - they don't require any further
On 06/15/2012 10:26 AM, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 15/06/2012 17:05, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
>> I don't think you get to have it both ways. Either we stabilize an
>> image and
>> put a stamp on it and we need some kind of freeze or we don't. Trying
>> to let
>> developers continue to do their
Le 15/06/2012 17:05, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
I don't think you get to have it both ways. Either we stabilize an image and
put a stamp on it and we need some kind of freeze or we don't. Trying to let
developers continue to do their work while ignoring the milestone just pushes
the problem of g
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:52:20AM +0100, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> I think the practicalities of it are Colin running change-override
> lots and updating livefs and cdimage to use universe.
This is now done.
Source packages moved to universe in their entirety:
amarok
analitza
ark
avogad
On 06/15/2012 10:46 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, June 15, 2012 10:28:55 AM Stéphane Graber wrote:
>> On 06/15/2012 10:12 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> At UDS I had some "hallway discussions" about why we freeze for Alphas
>>> and Betas, and the fact that I think it is ti
On Friday, June 15, 2012 04:57:57 PM Rick Spencer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
> > On Friday, June 15, 2012 04:41:51 PM Rick Spencer wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> The essential point is, Ubuntu should be good every day. There should
> >> be nothing special about an
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, June 15, 2012 04:41:51 PM Rick Spencer wrote:
> ...
>> The essential point is, Ubuntu should be good every day. There should
>> be nothing special about an alpha or beta, it's simply the daily image
>> on some chosen day. Making
On Friday, June 15, 2012 04:41:51 PM Rick Spencer wrote:
...
> The essential point is, Ubuntu should be good every day. There should
> be nothing special about an alpha or beta, it's simply the daily image
> on some chosen day. Making them special doesn't buy us anything, but
> has costs.
...
Then
On Friday, June 15, 2012 10:28:55 AM Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 06/15/2012 10:12 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > At UDS I had some "hallway discussions" about why we freeze for Alphas
> > and Betas, and the fact that I think it is time to drop this practice
> > and rather focus on
>> Cheers, Rick
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> We certainly want to allow people to upload stuff to -proposed during a
> milestone week, but I don't agree that we should automatically copy from
> -proposed to the release pocket during a milestone week.
>
> We usually try to release all our images with the same v
On 06/15/2012 10:12 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> At UDS I had some "hallway discussions" about why we freeze for Alphas
> and Betas, and the fact that I think it is time to drop this practice
> and rather focus on making Ubuntu good quality each day. Sadly, there
> was no session on th
Hello all,
At UDS I had some "hallway discussions" about why we freeze for Alphas
and Betas, and the fact that I think it is time to drop this practice
and rather focus on making Ubuntu good quality each day. Sadly, there
was no session on this, thus this email to this list for discussion.
I thin
Hi Daniel
On 15/06/12 13:31, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> On 15.06.2012 14:08, James Page wrote:
>>> SRU's which have been uploaded but not accepted are hard to
>>> differentiate on the report - they don't require any further
>>> sponsor action so it would be good to be able to filter those
>>> out if
Hello,
On 15.06.2012 14:08, James Page wrote:
> SRU's which have been uploaded but not accepted are hard to
> differentiate on the report - they don't require any further sponsor
> action so it would be good to be able to filter those out if possible.
That's a good point. I usually set the bug to
Report for my patch piloting today:
https://code.launchpad.net/~veger/ubuntu/quantal/jsch/fix-for-803492-v2/+merge/104706
- Made minor tweak to OSGi manifest for new upstream release and
uploaded.
https://code.launchpad.net/~gandelman-a/ubuntu/precise/openldap/proposed-rebuild/+merge/104814
-
16 matches
Mail list logo