Re: Scheduling 10.2

[Joerg Jaspert]

On 15562 March 1977, Adam D. Barratt wrote:


- November 9th
- November 16th
- November 23rd


All work for me.

--
bye, Joerg

Re: Scheduling 10.2

[Steve McIntyre]

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 08:26:52PM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>It's (really past) time to consider a date for the second buster point
>release.
>
>I've listed some suggested dates below; please indicate which you would
>be available for.
>
>- November 2nd
>  - I'm not available; also means that the freeze would have to be this

Andy are are both away that weekend, so difficult for the images team.

>coming weekend
>- November 9th
>- November 16th

Both OK.

>- November 23rd

Both busy that Saturday

>- November 30th

Works for me.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
< Aardvark> I dislike C++ to start with. C++11 just seems to be
handing rope-creating factories for users to hang multiple
instances of themselves.

Re: Scheduling 10.2

[Cyril Brulebois]

Adam D. Barratt  (2019-10-21):
> It's (really past) time to consider a date for the second buster point
> release.

I haven't been paying close attention to -boot over the past few days,
but I don't have anything to get fixed in buster right away AFAICT, so
please take the following with a grain of salt.

> I've listed some suggested dates below; please indicate which you
> would be available for.
> 
> - November 2nd
>   - I'm not available; also means that the freeze would have to be
> this coming weekend

Heavy week+travels before and after, clearly not the best for me.

> - November 9th

Doable (if what I wrote above regarding close to nothing to pu before
the deadline is correct).

> - November 16th
> - November 23rd
> - November 30th
>   - a little late, and I'm not available

All those are good for me.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#942893: ftp.debian.org: please drop MD5sum lines from Packages

[Ansgar]

Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
> The Packages file is growing, and we would like to keep it smaller.
>
> The MD5sum lines are vestigial at this point.  Anything that they do
> can be done better with the data from the SHA256sum lines.

I agree it would be nice to remove MD5sum from Packages; there are a few
other fields that might also not be that useful (e.g. Maintainer).

> #887831 suggests that jigdo may currently still be broken if MD5sum
> goes away, but perhaps that's more of a reflection on the unmaintained
> state of jigdo than it is on the state of the archive.

>From looking, I believe it is debian-cd's tools/grab_md5 that is using
the MD5sum from Packages (and Sources) to avoid having to compute all
these checksums itself.

We could look into either

 - writing MD5sum in a separate file only used by debian-cd (if present,
   otherwise debian-cd should fall back to using Packages), or

 - using a (truncated) sha256sum; this requires that the jigdo client
   only uses the "md5sum" as an opaque identifier for a file.

I've CC'ed debian-cd@ for input.

Ansgar