Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jack Henschel
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package name: httplab
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Gustavo Chaín
URL : https://github.com/gchaincl/httplab
Licens
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> A package can only be in a single section.
That wouldn't prevent adding subsetted Packages files:
deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free/firmware non-free/docs
Types: deb
URIs: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/
Suites: unst
]] Sean Whitton
> Could you explain why you want to do this with metapackages, rather than
> extending the definition of an archive section so that non-free and
> contrib may be more finely divided up? The various implementation
> problems that have been raised in this thread are all/mostly due
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:33:50AM +0800, ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) wrote:
> > * Where and when reports are published?
>
> The yearly reports are published in http://ocf.tw/, the following are
> reports for 2015, and 2016, in Traditional Chinese:
>
> * http://ocf.tw/report/2015/
> * http://beta.ocf.
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 06:47:35PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> I have gone through your page and here are my first remarks:
> - The bylaws are not in english and are not stored in a file (I see you use
> a pad to share it). You may want to publish it on a webpage or a flat file
> with a versio
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-errors
Version : 0.0~git20160704.0.d24ebc2-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
* U
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-analysis
Version : 0.0~git20160815.0.b44dc87-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
*
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-loads
Version : 0.0~git20160704.0.18441df-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
* UR
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-strfmt
Version : 0.0~git20160812.0.d65c7fd-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
* U
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-runtime
Version : 0.0~git20160704.0.11e322e-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
*
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tim Potter
* Package name: golang-github-go-openapi-validate
Version : 0.0~git20160704.0.deaf2c9-1
Upstream Author : OpenAPI Initiative golang toolkit
*
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:08:33PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 03:05:42PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Under current practices, must one be a member of the 'qa' UNIX group in
> > order to submit RM bugs for orphaned packages, using the "RoQA"
> > notation?
>
> No.
>
>
Am 07.03.2017 um 23:11 schrieb Sean Whitton:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:08:33PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> For as long as RoQA go, everybody is QA.
>
> Thanks.
If I see a package which looks unmaintained, is possibly RC buggy and
doesn't look like worth keeping in Debian, I've filed RoAQ R
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:08:33PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> For as long as RoQA go, everybody is QA.
Thanks.
> (also, not being in the 'qa' unix group should not stop you from doing
> "QA" :))
Right, this part is clear from the conventions about QA uploads.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.as
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 03:05:42PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Under current practices, must one be a member of the 'qa' UNIX group in
> order to submit RM bugs for orphaned packages, using the "RoQA"
> notation?
No.
For as long as RoQA go, everybody is QA.
(also, not being in the 'qa' unix grou
Dear all,
Under current practices, must one be a member of the 'qa' UNIX group in
order to submit RM bugs for orphaned packages, using the "RoQA"
notation?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Dear Ian,
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:48:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I have a suggestion for how this could be done.
>
> We give each reason-why-a-package-might-be-nonfree-or-contrib
> a name in the package namespace. I'm going to call these packages
> antimetapackages.
It would be good if
The Wanderer writes ("Re: Non-free RFCs in stretch"):
> Can you provide an example of how, under your proposal, someone who
> wants to - e.g. - forbid the installation of any nonfree-gfdl-invariant
> packages would do so? I don't see any way to accomplish that based on
> Recommends:, precisely beca
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:53:34PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I think Debian has better things to do than working on fine grained control
> over non-free stuff. Obviously anybody is free to work on this, but I dont
> think we should make our repositories, packages, policies and workflow s
>
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:40:15PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Non-free RFCs in stretch"):
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:48:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > We give each reason-why-a-package-might-be-nonfree-or-contrib
> > > a name in the package namespace. I'm goin
On 2017-03-07 at 11:40, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Non-free RFCs in stretch"):
>
>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:48:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>
>>> I have a suggestion for how this could be done.
>>>
>>> We give each reason-why-a-package-might-be-nonfree-or-contrib a
>>
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:40:15PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
[...]
> I would like to shelve this suggestion. The concept of
> antimetapackages can certainly be used this way from a technical point
> of view, but I think the goal there is controversial. Maintainers of
> packages currently in main
Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Non-free RFCs in stretch"):
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:48:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I have a suggestion for how this could be done.
> >
> > We give each reason-why-a-package-might-be-nonfree-or-contrib
> > a name in the package namespace. I'm going to call th
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:48:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I have a suggestion for how this could be done.
>
> We give each reason-why-a-package-might-be-nonfree-or-contrib
> a name in the package namespace. I'm going to call these packages
> antimetapackages.
>
> Each package in non-free or
Philip Hands writes ("Re: Non-free RFCs in stretch"):
> I presume this issue arises because people (myself included) dislike the
> fact that in order to install some RFCs and/or GNU documentation one has
> to flick a switch that also opens the door to some thoroughly
> proprietary software.
This i
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Aivar Annamaa
* Package name: thonny
Version : 2.1.0
Upstream Author : Aivar Annamaa
* URL : http://thonny.org
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Python IDE for beginners
Thonny is a simple P
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Henti Smith
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
* Package name: rpc
Version : 0.0~git20160927.0.22c016f-1
Upstream Author : Gorilla web toolkit
* URL : https://github.com/gorill
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Henti Smith
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
* Package name: golang-github-fatih-structs
Version : 0.0~git20170103.0.a720dfa-1
Upstream Author : Fatih Arslan
* URL : https://
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Rahulkrishnan R A
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-querystring
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Author : Irakli Gozalishvili
* URL : https://github.com/Gozala/querystring
* License : Expat
Progr
On 2017-03-05 03:52:33 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I would also expect that users running command-line tools to set the
> time, such as ntpdate, have enough technical understanding to
> distinguish the system clock and RTC.
And what's worse is that by default, ntpdate is run automatically from
/
On 2017-02-28 20:01:52 +0100, Carsten Leonhardt wrote:
> Daniel Pocock writes:
>
> > On 27/02/17 21:26, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >> But ntpd is also known to have a large amount of code written
> >> without as much regard for security as one would hope. It seems
> >> like an unnecessary risk for m
On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:15:23 -0500, Christopher Clements
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 05:01:40PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> >However, because the spam meaasges are created by copying most of the
> >headers from a genuine list mail, when you reply to such a message, it
> >turns up on our lists
32 matches
Mail list logo
