Adam Borowski wrote...
> Thus, I'd like to propose a new kind of wnpp bug: "Intent To Remove".
Sounds like a very good idea. For me, I could automatically parse these
and check against the list of packages installed on my systems, or are
used to build packages (thanks for .buildinfo files) outsid
Jeremy Bicha wrote...
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Christoph Biedl
> wrote:
> > Or for example the xmem removal (#733668):
>
> 4 years ago.
So?
> > And also give it some time, I'd suggest some two to four weeks.
>
> I don't think we need to add an artificial delay for package removals
>
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 01 2018, Ben Finney wrote:
> Jeremy Bicha has a short post describing how a repository on Debian's
> GitLab can customise its avatar or logo.
>
> There’s a useful under-documented feature I found. If you place a
> logo.png in the root of your repository, it will be auto
On Thursday, February 01, 2018 11:56:21 AM Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> > For example
>
> Here is another example of a low-quality RM bug; removal at request of
> the maintainer, with no reason stated.
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/887554
>
> As a resu
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> For example
Here is another example of a low-quality RM bug; removal at request of
the maintainer, with no reason stated.
https://bugs.debian.org/887554
As a result of this, DSA has to resort to stretch or snapshot.d.o for
out-of-band acce
Howdy all,
Jeremy Bicha has a short post describing how a repository on Debian's
GitLab can customise its avatar or logo.
There’s a useful under-documented feature I found. If you place a
logo.png in the root of your repository, it will be automatically
used as the default “avatar” fo
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 01:12:21AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Thus, I'd like to propose a new kind of wnpp bug: "Intent To Remove".
> It's pretty much the opposite of O:
[...]
> * by filing an ITR, you don't disclaim your commitment to the package (if
> you're the maintainer, you may or may no
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 08:14:31PM +0100, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> It has happened to me in the recent years quite a few times that a
> package which I was using has a RoQA bug filed against it, and the
> package's got removed at a very short notice.
For example, dasher was removed (by its maintain
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Markus Koschany
* Package name: jboss-threads
Version : 2.3.0
Upstream Author : Red Hat Inc.
* URL : https://github.com/jbossas/jboss-threads
* License : Apache-2.0 and LGPL-2.1
Programming Lang: Java
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
(Please don't file other ITR bugs, I'm trying to gauge how our existing
infrastructure (PTS, wnpp-alert, etc) handles a new type of wnpp bug. And
more importantly, let's see how _people_ handle this concept.)
I propose removal of "gnats", the old GNU bug tracking
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 22:36:50 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:40:19PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > I think we should remove cruft more aggressively then we currently do.
> > We are much too lenient with what we ship in our stable releases.
>
> I agree, thanks. Re-addi
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Pete Heist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
* Package name: irtt
Version : 0.9+git20180131.0.7d52098-1
Upstream Author : Pete Heist
* URL : https://github.com/peteheist/irtt
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 22:25:31 +0100, Andreas Ronnquist wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 20:14:31 +0100,
> Andrej Shadura wrote:
> >Should I've known someone's going to remove it, I would have adopted
> >it earlier.
If I understand the rules correctly, if a package is present in any
suite in the main
On January 31, 2018 10:34:28 PM UTC, Michael Biebl
wrote:
>Am 31.01.2018 um 22:49 schrieb Don Armstrong:
>> On Wed, 31 Jan 2018, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
>>> Me too likes to extend the removal notice for few weeks/months.
>>> Especially removal from testing when outside freeze periods.
>>
>> Pa
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:40:19PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I think we should remove cruft more aggressively then we currently do.
> We are much too lenient with what we ship in our stable releases.
I agree, thanks. Re-adding stuff is easy.
(3 months before the freeze we should stop those cr
Am 31.01.2018 um 22:49 schrieb Don Armstrong:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2018, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
>> Me too likes to extend the removal notice for few weeks/months.
>> Especially removal from testing when outside freeze periods.
>
> Packages removed from testing outside of the freeze can be easily
> re
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
> Me too likes to extend the removal notice for few weeks/months.
> Especially removal from testing when outside freeze periods.
Packages removed from testing outside of the freeze can be easily
re-added to testing once the underlying RC bugs are fixed.
Am 31.01.2018 um 20:14 schrieb Andrej Shadura:
> Hi everyone,
>
> It has happened to me in the recent years quite a few times that a
> package which I was using has a RoQA bug filed against it, and the
> package's got removed at a very short notice.
>
> For example, in #616376, gbdfed was removed
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 20:14:31 +0100,
Andrej Shadura wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>It has happened to me in the recent years quite a few times that a
>package which I was using has a RoQA bug filed against it, and the
>package's got removed at a very short notice.
>
>For example, in #616376, gbdfed was re
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 21:03 +0100, Christoph Biedl wrote:
> > It has happened to me in the recent years quite a few times that a
>
> > package which I was using has a RoQA bug filed against it, and the
>
> > package's got removed at a very short notice.
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
>
> You meant "RM"? Le
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Christoph Biedl
wrote:
> Or for example the xmem removal (#733668):
4 years ago.
> More suggestions for the, say, manual removals (mostly ROM, ROP, RoQA):
> And also give it some time, I'd suggest some two to four weeks.
I don't think we need to add an artifici
Andrej Shadura wrote...
> It has happened to me in the recent years quite a few times that a
> package which I was using has a RoQA bug filed against it, and the
> package's got removed at a very short notice.
+1
You meant "RM"? Let me extend this to package removals in general since
I'm not to
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 2:14 PM, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> For example, in #616376, gbdfed was removed
This happened 7 years ago. Sorry :(
> Here you go, there's #871004 for you. Missed jessie, stretch,
> not in testing, no uploads since the beginning of 2017.
I don't think you'll get much sympat
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 19:04 +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 2018-01-31 17:37 GMT+03:00 Luca Boccassi :
> > On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 00:05 +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > > Owner: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
> > >
> > > * Package
Hello,
2018-01-31 17:37 GMT+03:00 Luca Boccassi :
> On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 00:05 +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
>>
>> * Package name: odp
>> Version : 1.17.0.0
>> Upstream Author : Linaro
>> * URL
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 00:05 +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
>
> * Package name: odp
> Version : 1.17.0.0
> Upstream Author : Linaro
> * URL : http://www.opendataplane.org/
> * License
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 02:41:15PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> But if -jN breaks, that's because the package is not parallel build
> safe, so using -J will not improve things, as the package has not
> opted in (or has opted out depending on the debhelper used) from
> parallel builds anyway.
The g
On 2018-01-31 14:41, Guillem Jover wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 07:35:32 +0100, Philipp Hahn wrote:
Using parallel build (-jX) fails for us, so it takes ~13h to compile
that gcc. I was told to use '-J' instead, but that is not supported by
dpkg-buildpackage in Debian-Stretch :-(
dpkg-buil
Package: wnpp
Owner: Salvatore Bonaccorso
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libmonitoring-icinga2-client-rest-perl
Version : 2.0.0
Upstream Author : Johan Carlquist
* URL : https://metacpan.org
Hi!
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 07:35:32 +0100, Philipp Hahn wrote:
> Using parallel build (-jX) fails for us, so it takes ~13h to compile
> that gcc. I was told to use '-J' instead, but that is not supported by
> dpkg-buildpackage in Debian-Stretch :-(
dpkg-buildpackage does support -J in stretch (sta
Dmitry wrote:
>Package: wnpp
>Severity: wishlist
>Owner: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
>
>* Package name: odp
> Version : 1.17.0.0
> Upstream Author : Linaro
>* URL : http://www.opendataplane.org/
>* License : BSD 3-clause
> Programming Lang: C
> Description : Op
Hi Steve,
2018-01-31 14:59 GMT+03:00 Steve McIntyre :
> Dmitry wrote:
>>Package: wnpp
>>Severity: wishlist
>>Owner: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
>>
>>* Package name: odp
>> Version : 1.17.0.0
>> Upstream Author : Linaro
>>* URL : http://www.opendataplane.org/
>>* License
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 07:35:32AM +0100, Philipp Hahn wrote:
> Using parallel build (-jX) fails for us, so it takes ~13h to compile
> that gcc. I was told to use '-J' instead, but that is not supported by
> dpkg-buildpackage in Debian-Stretch :-(
You can always use DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n ins
Robin Geuze schrieb:
> I was wondering, are the debian maintainers planning on backporting the
> -mindirect-branch=thunk support introduced in GCC 7.3 and 8.1 to the
> compilers available on Jessie and Stretch? While this is not necessarily
> a security fix for the compiler it does provide that
Philipp Hahn wrote:
> PS: Here are the 7 relevant GIT commpits for gcc-4.9 from H.J. Lu's GIT
> repository for reference:
>> 1fb3a1828fa x86: Disallow -mindirect-branch=/-mfunction-return= with
>> -mcmodel=large
>> 7ab5b649f72 x86: Add 'V' register operand modifier
>> 5550079949a x86: Add -mindire
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sébastien Villemot
* Package name: r-cran-bdsmatrix
Version : 1.3-3
Upstream Author : Terry Therneau
* URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=bdsmatrix
* License : LGPL-2+
Programming Lang: GNU R
Description :
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andreas Tille
* Package name: r-cran-mclust
Version : 5.4-1
Upstream Author : Chris Fraley, Adrian E. Raftery, Luca Scrucca, Thomas
Brendan Murphy, Michael Fop
* URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=mclust
* License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Goirand
* Package name: panko
Version : 3.1.0
Upstream Author : OpenStack Foundation
* URL : https://github.com/openstack/panko
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Python
Description : OpenStack Event
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Goirand
* Package name: python-pankoclient
Version : 0.3.0
Upstream Author : OpenStack Foundation
* URL : https://github.com/openstack/python-pankoclient
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Python
Descrip
39 matches
Mail list logo
