Re: Permissions to push to installer project

Hi Steve! On 05/07/2018 06:31 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> In the process of switching from Alioth to Salsa, I lost commit access >> to the debian-installer project. Would it be possible to be added to the >> group of committers again, so I can continue to push changes for Debian >> Ports? > > I'

Re: Permissions to push to installer project

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 05:01:01PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >Hi! > >In the process of switching from Alioth to Salsa, I lost commit access >to the debian-installer project. Would it be possible to be added to the >group of committers again, so I can continue to push changes for Debia

Re: Archiving the attic folders from d-i for ports

On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 17:01 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 05/07/2018 04:59 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > According to the mails[0] whatever remain on alioth is going to be > > archived: > > > > > 10.-13.05.18: darcs, bzr and mercurial repositories will be > > > exported > > > as tarba

Re: Archiving the attic folders from d-i for ports

On 05/07/2018 04:59 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: According to the mails[0] whatever remain on alioth is going to be archived: 10.-13.05.18: darcs, bzr and mercurial repositories will be exported as tarballs and made available readonly from a new archive host, details on that will follow

Permissions to push to installer project

Hi! In the process of switching from Alioth to Salsa, I lost commit access to the debian-installer project. Would it be possible to be added to the group of committers again, so I can continue to push changes for Debian Ports? In the meantime, could someone review this change for debian-installe

Re: Archiving the attic folders from d-i for ports

On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 10:34 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 05/07/2018 04:29 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > > I was only talking about the still needed ones. linux-kernel-* > > > is > > > clearly not and I doubt it have any practical value to look at. > > > > My thoughts too. Adrian:

Processed: found 896071 in 1.0.96

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > found 896071 1.0.96 Bug #896071 [debootstrap] debootstrap fails to retrive Release file over https Marked as found in versions debootstrap/1.0.96. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 896071: https://bu

Re: Processed: block 839046 with 134758

On May 07, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > block 839046 with 134758 > Bug #839046 [debootstrap] debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default > Bug #839162 [debootstrap] Enabled merged-/usr by default I totally disagree that this is in any way a blocking issue: it is at best cosmetical since

Processed: block 839046 with 858331

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 839046 with 858331 Bug #839046 [debootstrap] debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default Bug #839162 [debootstrap] Enabled merged-/usr by default 839046 was blocked by: 134758 860433 198220 433290 839046 was not blocking any bugs. Added bloc

Processed: block 839046 with 134758

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 839046 with 134758 Bug #839046 [debootstrap] debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default Bug #839162 [debootstrap] Enabled merged-/usr by default 839046 was blocked by: 860433 839046 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 839046

Re: Archiving the attic folders from d-i for ports

On 05/07/2018 04:29 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: I was only talking about the still needed ones. linux-kernel-* is clearly not and I doubt it have any practical value to look at. My thoughts too. Adrian: Sorry, but I'm *not* just going to import all of those dead modules. Actually useful things,