Hi Sean,
Am Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 06:22:57PM +0100 schrieb Sean Whitton:
>
> This is the third or fourth time this has happened with the Policy delegation!
Thank you for pointing this out. I did circulate the text for review,
but unfortunately this detail was not noticed at that stage. Hopefully
tho...@goirand.fr:
On Aug 20, 2025 11:55, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What I oppose is the retrofitting of a new, not well defined policy on
the Debian group, to turn it into a "Debian Collaborative Maintenance
Team".
Lucas
Well, the "debian" namespace comes from the migration of "
On Aug 20, 2025 11:55, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> What I oppose is the retrofitting of a new, not well defined policy on
> the Debian group, to turn it into a "Debian Collaborative Maintenance
> Team".
>
> Lucas
Well, the "debian" namespace comes from the migration of "collab-maint" in
On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 01:01:28 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard
wrote:
>LowThreshold NMUs recommend coordination ahead of non-maintainer uploads
>and are limited to non-important changes.
>
>What I object to is uncoordinated uploads.
>
>Hope that makes sense.
It absolutely does. I feel the same.
Greetings
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 23:06:02 +0200, Carsten Leonhardt
wrote:
>Lucas Nussbaum writes:
>
>> Maybe, instead than retrofitting a policy on the debian salsa group, a
>> good way to both clarify the situation and allow an opt-in mechanism
>> would be to create another group on salsa, with rules clearly
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:05 AM Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I was not describing sloppy drive-by, just drive-by. Me not releasing
> the newest and most shiny upstream has to offer might be due to some
> knowledge that I have as maintainer and that even a careful and 100%
> well-intended driver-by c
Quoting Jeremy Bicha (2025-08-21 00:14:12)
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:05 AM Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I was not describing sloppy drive-by, just drive-by. Me not releasing
> > the newest and most shiny upstream has to offer might be due to some
> > knowledge that I have as maintainer and that
Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> Maybe, instead than retrofitting a policy on the debian salsa group, a
> good way to both clarify the situation and allow an opt-in mechanism
> would be to create another group on salsa, with rules clearly defined
> from the start, and let maintainers decide of the mainte
On 17692 March 1977, M. Zhou wrote:
> So any previous FTPMaster delegation is still in force, as it did
> not get
> revoked? And we do not have any policy delegation anymore, as none
> was listed?
> Or asked differently: How strict do we go with words in those
> entirely formal
> delegation
Hello,
On Wed 20 Aug 2025 at 04:41pm -04, M. Zhou wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-08-20 at 18:22 +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Wed 20 Aug 2025 at 05:17pm +02, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>>
>> > On 17690 March 1977, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> >
>> > > Any previous Debian Policy delegation not explici
On Wed, 2025-08-20 at 18:22 +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed 20 Aug 2025 at 05:17pm +02, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> > On 17690 March 1977, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >
> > > Any previous Debian Policy delegation not explicitly listed above is
> > > revoked. The delegation is not time-lim
Hello,
On Wed 20 Aug 2025 at 05:17pm +02, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 17690 March 1977, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
>> Any previous Debian Policy delegation not explicitly listed above is
>> revoked. The delegation is not time-limited and will be effective until
>> further changes by present or future P
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alexander Sulfrian
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-ffmpeg-progress-yield
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Contact: Werner Robitza
* URL : https://github.com/slhck/ffmpe
Le Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 09:54:05AM +0200, Andrea Pappacoda a écrit :
> Are you taking about Salsa here? I think this is a great idea, but I'm not
> sure this is possible.
My main interactions with git Web UIs are with cgit, that allows to set
that in a trivial way. So I assumed it would have been
On 2025-08-19 Andreas Tille wrote:
> Am Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 11:37:42PM +0200 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum:
>>> One point raised during the BoF was the need to better document the role
>>> of the Debian/ group on Salsa. Not all developers are aware that being
>>> part of this group allows any DD to uplo
On 17690 March 1977, Andreas Tille wrote:
Any previous Debian Policy delegation not explicitly listed above is
revoked. The delegation is not time-limited and will be effective
until
further changes by present or future Project Leaders.
So any previous FTPMaster delegation is still in force,
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>> Maybe one consideration is that we COULD assume that the drive-by
>> uploader is acting in good faith and has done her homework and has a
>> better upload to offer than what you (or me) could ever have prepared?
>>
>> Rather than to assume they upload brokenness. Whi
[dropping lea...@debian.org from this subthread]
Quoting Simon Josefsson (2025-08-20 14:39:00)
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>
> > Quoting Simon Josefsson (2025-08-20 13:02:28)
> >> > Sometimes I am in the middle of some larger transition that involves
> >> > multiple packages, or I am aware of som
I am confused now.
Quoting Andreas Tille (2025-08-20 15:08:54)
> I agree that active maintainers should always be informed in advance
>
The above remark totally confuses me, and makes me wonder if I have
wasted everyones time
Am Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 11:03:38AM +0200 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:
> Quoting Andreas Tille (2025-08-20 10:35:20)
> > Can you give some practical examples of packages that you would not want
> > to see covered by such a policy? That would help me better understand
> > your concerns.
>
> (reading it
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> Quoting Simon Josefsson (2025-08-20 13:02:28)
>> > Sometimes I am in the middle of some larger transition that involves
>> > multiple packages, or I am aware of some details with newer upstream
>> > that makes me decide to hold back on pulling that into Debian just yet.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Reinhard Tartler
* Package name: golang-k8s-sigs-knftables
Version : 0.0.18-1
Upstream Author : Kubernetes SIGs
* URL : https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/knftables
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Descript
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Colin Watson
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-pytest-run-parallel
Version : 0.6.1
Upstream Contact: Quansight Labs
* URL : https://github.com/Quansight-Labs/pytest-run-parallel
* License
Quoting Simon Josefsson (2025-08-20 13:02:28)
> > Sometimes I am in the middle of some larger transition that involves
> > multiple packages, or I am aware of some details with newer upstream
> > that makes me decide to hold back on pulling that into Debian just yet.
> > Often I do so without forma
On 8/20/25 12:39, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:49:50AM +0200, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:
we have the following issue that on Debian Trixie for the
architectures armhf/armel some of our internal Debian package no
longer build as the dependencies are no longer fulfilled.
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> So you would be fine with me right now uploading gnulib 20250820 and
> golang-github-smallstep-crypto 0.63.0 to unstable, without discussing it
> with you first?
Yes. While I am working on both of these (right now) I consider it a
race to upload, and I shoul
Hi Quirin,
On mer. 20 août 2025 10:49:50, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have the following issue that on Debian Trixie for the architectures
> armhf/armel some of our internal Debian package no longer build as the
> dependencies are no longer fulfilled. As most libraries no longer
> prov
https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time
Best Regards,
Tianyu Chen
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025, 6:24 PM Quirin Gylstorff
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have the following issue that on Debian Trixie for the architectures
> armhf/armel some of our internal Debian package no longer build as the
> depende
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:49:50AM +0200, Quirin Gylstorff wrote:
we have the following issue that on Debian Trixie for the
architectures armhf/armel some of our internal Debian package no
longer build as the dependencies are no longer fulfilled. As most
libraries no longer provide the old libr
suggested is okay, in
> this situation.
>
> I'm fine with anyone else doing uploads of "my" packages. The more
> uploads the better. I believe any mistakes are better handled by making
> new uploads, not by preventing people to do uploads.
So you would be fi
Hello,
we have the following issue that on Debian Trixie for the architectures
armhf/armel some of our internal Debian package no longer build as the
dependencies are no longer fulfilled. As most libraries no longer
provide the old library name, like for example on amd64. E.g. for
libssl3 on
On 20/08/25 at 10:35 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Jörg,
>
> Am Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 11:15:36PM +0200 schrieb Joerg Jaspert:
> > On 17691 March 1977, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe, instead than retrofitting a policy on the debian salsa group, a
> > > good way to both clarify the situat
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 11:03:38AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
For me, the concern is not tied to specific packages. I have used this
namespace for 100s of packages to encourage collaboration but with the
assumption that "Maintainer" and "Uploaders" still have a meaning.
By using the "debian"
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> For me, the concern is not tied to specific packages. I have used this
> namespace for 100s of packages to encourage collaboration but with the
> assumption that "Maintainer" and "Uploaders" still have a meaning.
>
> By using the "debian" namespace, I did not mean to in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Elena Grandi
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: pdf2docx
Version : 0.5.8
Upstream Contact: Pradyun Gedam
* URL : https://pdf2docx.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
* License : AGPL-3
Programming Lang:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Simon Josefsson
* Package name: golang-github-dgraph-io-badger
Version : 4.8.0-1
Upstream Author : Dgraph
* URL : https://github.com/dgraph-io/badger
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Description : Fast
Quoting Andreas Tille (2025-08-20 10:35:20)
> Can you give some practical examples of packages that you would not want
> to see covered by such a policy? That would help me better understand
> your concerns.
(reading it as the plural "you"...)
I share Lucas' concern of you redefining the rules of
On 2025-08-20 10:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
@Lucas, one practical drawback is that moving a repository out of
Debian/ requires opening an issue for the Salsa admins, since only they
can remove repositories there. I would prefer to minimize the number of
such tickets.
Surely there could be a techn
Hi Jörg,
Am Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 11:15:36PM +0200 schrieb Joerg Jaspert:
> On 17691 March 1977, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > Maybe, instead than retrofitting a policy on the debian salsa group, a
> > good way to both clarify the situation and allow an opt-in mechanism
> > would be to create anothe
Am Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 08:35:32AM +0200 schrieb Xavier:
> BTW, I found a way to build a template for Gitlab
I love to repeat: You rock!
Thanks a lot
Andreas.
--
https://fam-tille.de
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alastair McKinstry
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-scie...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: fortran-jonquil
Version : 0.3.0
Upstream Contact: Sebastian Ehlert
* URL : https://github.com/toml-f/jonquil
* Licens
41 matches
Mail list logo
