* Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 09:55]:
> Throw in a link to the full list for RFA/O/RFH too? Apart from
> that, I'd love to see it on d-d-a.
I've done that now and will send the posting to -devel. I'm not sure
about d-d-a yet but that can easily be changed later.
--
Martin Mi
* Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-22 23:21]:
> >> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
> >> amount of time before processing, for complete removals, in any case.
> >
> > That's someone I wanted to suggest anyway. While I'm happy to see
> > removals h
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 11:21:45PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 11:48]:
> >> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
> >> amount of time before processing,
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 11:48]:
>> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
>> amount of time before processing, for complete removals, in any case.
>
> That's someone I wanted to suggest anyw
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 11:48]:
> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
> amount of time before processing, for complete removals, in any case.
That's someone I wanted to suggest anyway. While I'm happy to see
removals happening much m
* Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 09:55]:
> Throw in a link to the full list for RFA/O/RFH too? Apart from that,
> I'd love to see it on d-d-a.
OK, I'll add links. Note sure about d-d-a or d-d yet. Someone also
suggested an RSS feed.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 07:31:57AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 18:08]:
> > One suggestion might be to include both new entries, and entries
> > that are about to be requested for removal. That seems like it might
> > be useful. What do you t
El Viernes 20 Mayo 2005 10:55, Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> * Martin Michlmayr
>
> | * Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 17:43]:
> | > I agree that this might be a good idea. debian-wnpp is quite
> | > cluttered with all the control messages from the BTS.
> | >
> | > What do other pe
* Martin Michlmayr
| * Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 17:43]:
| > I agree that this might be a good idea. debian-wnpp is quite
| > cluttered with all the control messages from the BTS.
| >
| > What do other people think of this? Do you want a shorter WNPP
| > posting with onl
* Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 17:43]:
> I agree that this might be a good idea. debian-wnpp is quite
> cluttered with all the control messages from the BTS.
>
> What do other people think of this? Do you want a shorter WNPP
> posting with only new entries on -devel?
FWIW, t
* Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 18:08]:
> One suggestion might be to include both new entries, and entries
> that are about to be requested for removal. That seems like it might
> be useful. What do you think?
There isn't really a way to find out entries which are going to be
Hi Martin,
On Thursday 19 May 2005 10:28, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) is an important part of
> our infrastructure used to discuss packages to be added to the archive
> and, in particular, to look for new or additional maintainers for
> existing packages.
* Ben Armstrong
| > How about posting the announcements to -devel (instead of -d-a)? If
| > only new entries are included, it wouldn't hurt much for those who are
| > not interested.
|
| I'd like to see them continue on -d-a. There are times when I just
| can't handle -devel and unsub completel
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 05:28:50PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) is an important part of
> our infrastructure used to discuss packages to be added to the archive
> and, in particular, to look for new or additional maintainers for
> existing packages.
On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 17:43 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 18:40]:
> > How about posting the announcements to -devel (instead of -d-a)? If
> > only new entries are included, it wouldn't hurt much for those who
> > are not interested.
>
> I agree t
Hi,
On Thursday 19 May 2005 18:43, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> What do other people think of this? Do you want a shorter WNPP
> posting with only new entries on -devel?
less frequent, maybe every four weeks ? i've got wnpp-alert in my cron for
weekly mails - if people reaaally care, they can put
On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 18:40 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> I always read the announcements to look for O or RFAs of packages I
> use, hence I appreciate the "only new entries" change.
Same here.
> However, from
> browsing the debian-wnpp archives, there's a lot more stuff there than
> I'm willing
* Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-19 18:40]:
> How about posting the announcements to -devel (instead of -d-a)? If
> only new entries are included, it wouldn't hurt much for those who
> are not interested.
I agree that this might be a good idea. debian-wnpp is quite
cluttered with all
Re: Martin Michlmayr in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I have therefore decided to stop the weekly WNPP summaries to d-d-a
> and instead do the following:
>
> - send the weekly posting to debian-wnpp instead of d-d-a
>
> - only include new entries
I always read the announcements to look for O or RFAs o
19 matches
Mail list logo
