Control: reopen -1
> don't complain about the communication style of the release team
> when they have to cope with hundreds of inquiries
Let's reopen the bug and discuss this after the freeze period, you're
not in a situation to accept comments AFAICS.
- Sylvain
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:29:3
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 09:29:28AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 2015-02-16 9:20, b...@debian.org wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:46:11AM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> >>If you want more changes to be considered, don't they need to be
> >>uploaded first? In that case, now is quite
On 2015-02-16 9:20, b...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:46:11AM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
If you want more changes to be considered, don't they need to be
uploaded first? In that case, now is quite late.
is a bit easy, I believe we made the effort to contact you as
ment
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:46:11AM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:24 AM:
> > You got it all wrong.
>
> So other than the typo s/font/fusion/, I don't really understand that
> statement. There were two unstable fusionforge uploads post-freeze
> that were in fact acc
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:24 AM:
> You got it all wrong.
So other than the typo s/font/fusion/, I don't really understand that
statement. There were two unstable fusionforge uploads post-freeze
that were in fact accepted into testing [0], and there are no other
proposed changes currently to revie
n.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=771944
> Debian Bug Tracking System
> Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 22:46:19 -0500
> From: Michael Gilbert
> To: 771944-cl...@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#771944: Following FusionForge 5.3 stable
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 11:03:59PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 06:52:26PM +0100, b...@debian.org wrote:
> > We're (upstream-ly) maintaining a stable branch for FusionForge,
> > called "5.3", which the Debian package currently follows.
> > (incidentally Lolando an
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 06:52:26PM +0100, b...@debian.org wrote:
> We're (upstream-ly) maintaining a stable branch for FusionForge,
> called "5.3", which the Debian package currently follows.
> (incidentally Lolando and I are both upstream and debian devs)
>
> We're currently pushing only bugfixes
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
We're (upstream-ly) maintaining a stable branch for FusionForge,
called "5.3", which the Debian package currently follows.
(incidentally Lolando and I are both upstream and debian devs)
We're currently
9 matches
Mail list logo
