On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Svante Signell wrote:
> Hi, is it possible to adopt this package?
The package is not orphaned yet, so that will have to happen first:
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#orphaning
When it is orphaned you can adopt it:
http://www.deb
On Tue, 2013-10-15 at 17:34 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> >xxxterm: bugs 718074, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
>
> I use debian offline so it is of no consequence to me however I
> just wanted to say.
>
> xxxterm (now xombrero) is by far my favourite browser and rediculously
> faster than
>xxxterm: bugs 718074, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
I use debian offline so it is of no consequence to me however I
just wanted to say.
xxxterm (now xombrero) is by far my favourite browser and rediculously
faster than any other browser whilst still being highly useful and with
better whit
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 03:53:35PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> >>gwyddion: bugs 713565, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
> >
> > Hmmm, that's really strange. The bug report was closed
> >
> >Sat, 29 Jun 2013 13:07:42 +0200
> >
> > Seems something is wrong with the script.
> >
>
On 2013-10-15 15:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Niels,
>
> [sorry for the late reply I was on vac]
>
Hi,
No worries.
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 09:52:17AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>
>> Andreas Tille
>>gdpc: bugs 713652, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
>
> Fixed.
>
Thank you,
>>g
Hi Niels,
[sorry for the late reply I was on vac]
On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 09:52:17AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
> Andreas Tille
>gdpc: bugs 713652, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
Fixed.
>gwyddion: bugs 713565, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
Hmmm, that's really strange. The bug
On 2013-10-08 00:04, Bill Allombert wrote:
> [...]
>
> So while it is possible that the _maintainer_ is not needing a friendly
> remainder, other interested third-party might.
>
> Cheers,
> Bill.
>
>
Hi,
I, genuinely, hope that these removals-warnings will make people fix
bugs pro-actively ra
On 08/10/13 at 19:36 +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:58:03AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > rc-alert has existed for quite some time and it gets the alert in
> > *ahead* of package removal. It alerts users to the real problem - the
> > RC BUG!
>
> Did you try to run rc-a
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:36:57PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Did you try to run rc-alert recently ? The output is totally overwhelming
> for something that is to run on several computers and several times by
> month. Most of the bugs are reported against important packages that cannot
> be rem
On Tue, 08 Oct 2013, Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
> Would this be addressed by building some mechanism (making tombstone
> packages comes to mind, but there are many options) for apt to
> prompt to remove packages that were removed in the archive?
It is already addressed by the user-oriented package man
Le Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:51:42PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer a
écrit :
>
> I really doubt that possibly interested people will subscribe to all the
> packages they are interested in.
Hello everybody,
in one way or the other, there will always be some people who miss the
inform
On 07/10/13 23:04, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I am concerned that in the event a package is removed from testing,
> the people most interested with restoring the package will miss the
> removal, since the package will stay installed on their systems.
> This, then, cause stable releases to be missing p
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:36:57 +
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:58:03AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > rc-alert has existed for quite some time and it gets the alert in
> > *ahead* of package removal. It alerts users to the real problem -
> > the RC BUG!
>
> Did you try to
Le 08/10/2013 18:46, Geoffrey Thomas a écrit :
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
>> I am concerned that in the event a package is removed from testing,
>> the people most interested with restoring the package will miss the
>> removal, since the package will stay installed on their syst
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:58:03AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> rc-alert has existed for quite some time and it gets the alert in
> *ahead* of package removal. It alerts users to the real problem - the
> RC BUG!
Did you try to run rc-alert recently ? The output is totally overwhelming
for somethi
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 09:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > I am concerned that in the event a package is removed from testing,
> > the people most interested with restoring the package will miss the
> > removal, since the package will stay in
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
I am concerned that in the event a package is removed from testing,
the people most interested with restoring the package will miss the
removal, since the package will stay installed on their systems.
Would this be addressed by building some mechanism
> On 8 Oct 2013, at 07:58, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> The removal is simply one way to fix
> the RC bug
I'm broadly in favour of this course of action but in no way does it fix the
bugs.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
Hi Bill,
Bill Allombert wrote (07 Oct 2013 22:04:21 GMT) :
> I am concerned that in the event a package is removed from testing,
> the people most interested with restoring the package will miss the
> removal, since the package will stay installed on their systems.
I believe there are good chance
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 22:04:21 +
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 09:52:17AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> >
> > This is a friendly reminder. If you are listed below, then the
> > listed packages of yours will be automatically removed from testing
> > within 15 days. The "first
On Tuesday 08 October 2013 01:51:41 Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Dienstag, 8. Oktober 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > So while it is possible that the _maintainer_ is not needing a friendly
> > remainder, other interested third-party might.
>
> anyone interested in a package can opt-in via t
Hi,
On Dienstag, 8. Oktober 2013, Bill Allombert wrote:
> So while it is possible that the _maintainer_ is not needing a friendly
> remainder, other interested third-party might.
anyone interested in a package can opt-in via the PTS...
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is
On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 09:52:17AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a friendly reminder. If you are listed below, then the listed
> packages of yours will be automatically removed from testing within 15
> days. The "first batch" of automatic removals will happen in about 8
> days.
>
On 06/10/13 08:52, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Laszlo Boszormenyi (GCS)
>vice: bugs 693641, flagged for removal in 8.3 days
Bug #693641 is another interesting edge case:
Found in version vice/2.3.dfsg-4 (testing, unstable, stable)
Fixed in version vice/2.4.dfsg-1 (unstable)
Marked as done
But it
Niels Thykier (2013-10-06):
> It looks like this is caused by kfreebsd-8 being marked with
> "Extra-Source-Only: yes", presumably because something lists it in
> "Built-Using". For most parts it means the package is already removed
> but not all tools seem to recognise this e.g. the PTS, the BTS
On 2013-10-06 13:09, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 06/10/13 08:52, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>kfreebsd-8: bugs 720470,717959,720476, flagged for removal in 14.7 days
>
> Not sure why that's appearing in this list because:
> 1. the package was removed from testing over a month ago at the
Hi,
On 06/10/13 08:52, Niels Thykier wrote:
>kfreebsd-8: bugs 720470,717959,720476, flagged for removal in 14.7 days
Not sure why that's appearing in this list because:
1. the package was removed from testing over a month ago at the request
of the maintainer, and
2. when that happened the bug
27 matches
Mail list logo
