On 2019, സെപ്റ്റംബർ 2 1:26:51 AM IST, Paul Gevers wrote:
>Hi Pirate, and other interested parties,
>
>On 09-08-2019 08:22, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>> On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 9 1:16:23 AM IST, Paul Gevers
>wrote:
>>> I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages
>>> that
>>> are i
Hi Pirate, and other interested parties,
On 09-08-2019 08:22, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 9 1:16:23 AM IST, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages
>> that
>> are in experimental, so if you interested in this, please contact me.
>> T
Hi,
On 18-08-2019 04:46, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages that
>> are in experimental, so if you interested in this, please contact me.
>
> **Yes please**. This will certainly help *a lot* specially for us that we
>
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 08:54:21AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > On 19/08/08 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > I think we should also try to improve the visibility towards reverse
> > > dependencies that their autopkgtest is blocking other packages. I would
> > > love tracker (and the old pts) to sho
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
> My personal point of view (and because of this it might be biased)
> is that the maintainers of the packages that ship autopkgtest should
> be the reponsibles for any
First of all sorry for the late late reply, I was hoping to find time to
reply to this sooner :-/
On 19/08/08 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07-08-2019 16:57, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release
> >
On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 9 1:16:23 AM IST, Paul Gevers wrote:
>I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages
>that
>are in experimental, so if you interested in this, please contact me.
>This would enable library maintainers to at least have an overview of
>what would happen. I c
Hi,
On 07-08-2019 16:57, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
> ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
>> No, what I have been perceiving (and pretty please note that this is my
>> personal "feeling")
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
> No, what I have been perceiving (and pretty please note that this is my
> personal "feeling") is that maintainers, specially library maintainers, have
>
Hi Paul!
El sáb., 20 jul. 2019 16:42, Paul Gevers escribió:
> Hi Lisandro,
>
> On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> >> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
> >> ===
> >>
> >> From now on, all autopkgtest
Hi Lisandro,
On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
>> ===
>>
>> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for
>> bullseye. So if your pac
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 08:17, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:07PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > You indeed missed someone (for obvious reasons): I'd like to thank
> > the release team for their excellent work!
>
> +1
>
+lots
> > On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100, Jon
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:07PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> You indeed missed someone (for obvious reasons): I'd like to thank
> the release team for their excellent work!
+1
> On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > The release of buster also means the bullseye r
On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> There are too many people who should be thanked for their work on getting us
> to
> this point to list them all individually, and we would be sure to miss some.
> Nevertheless, we would like to particularly thank the installer team,
Hello,
On Tue 09 Jul 2019 at 08:45AM -04, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Why is it, then, that binary-NEW still applies if there have been no
> source files added/removed? (A SONAME bump possibly being necessitated
> by some change that does not involve adding/removing/renaming source
> files.)
Fo
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 01:33:49PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon 08 Jul 2019 at 02:02PM +02, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> > I would go even further and drop the (manual) NEW queue for binary-NEW
> > packages.
> > Is there a good reason why new binary packages need manual processing
Hello,
On Tue 09 Jul 2019 at 12:16AM +02, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 07, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>
>> Q: I already did a binary upload, do I need to do a new (source-only)
>> upload?
>> A: Yes (preferably with other changes, not just a version bump).
> Is there any good reason why we st
Hello,
On Mon 08 Jul 2019 at 02:02PM +02, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I would go even further and drop the (manual) NEW queue for binary-NEW
> packages.
> Is there a good reason why new binary packages need manual processing by
> the FTP team? Couldn't this be fully automated?
The three things the F
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 12:16:53AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 07, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>
> > Q: I already did a binary upload, do I need to do a new (source-only)
> > upload?
> > A: Yes (preferably with other changes, not just a version bump).
> Is there any good reason why we
On Jul 07, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Q: I already did a binary upload, do I need to do a new (source-only)
> upload?
> A: Yes (preferably with other changes, not just a version bump).
Is there any good reason why we still do not have an interface to allow
developers to self-service reques
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by maintainers to
> migrate to testing. This means that you will need
Am 07.07.19 um 15:43 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> [...]
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>> =
>>
>> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to
>> begin.
>> Fr
Hi!
[snip with a huge yay!]
> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
> ===
>
> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for
> bullseye. So if your package has failing autopkgtests, now is a good time to
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 02:47:00AM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Shortly before the end of the 6th July, we released Debian 10, "buster".
*yay* *yay* & *yay*!
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means th
24 matches
Mail list logo
