On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 12:03 +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> > than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
>
> Before you do that:
Yeah, I know there are packages that should not be closed, probably, and
they could just hide from the view and be closed. What I really trust is
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 07:50 +0200, Martin Samuelsson wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
> in X days than bugs that had their initial post in Y days?
>
> Some packages are trickier than others to create and may therefor take
> more time. As long as peo
Paul TBBle Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:34:51PM +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
>> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
>> debian: http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/ffmpeg.html?
>
> Only ffmpeg-dev is in Debian as ffmpeg upstream recom
Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi David!
>
> About ITP's, they should be retitled to RFPs, rather than closed. That
> way, other people can have a go at packaging the software.
>
I concur. If someone did not produce a packge withing NN days (say 3
months) after ITP, the system shoul
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 12:03 +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> > than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
>
> Before you do that:
Yeah, I know there are packages that should not be closed, probably, and
they could just hide from the view and be closed. What I really trust is
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 07:50 +0200, Martin Samuelsson wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
> in X days than bugs that had their initial post in Y days?
>
> Some packages are trickier than others to create and may therefor take
> more time. As long as peo
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:34:51PM +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
> debian: http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/ffmpeg.html?
Only ffmpeg-dev is in Debian as ffmpeg upstream recommends static linking
due to not having fixed the API/AB
Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christian Marillat wrote:
>> Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> Package already in Debian : gstreamer0.8-ffmpeg
>
> Ops, then it should be closed.
>
> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
Normaly, encode
Christian Marillat wrote:
> Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>David Moreno Garza wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>>- note that there is software that probably can't be packaged:
>>
>>http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.c
Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Moreno Garza wrote:
>> On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
[...]
> - note that there is software that probably can't be packaged:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=203211
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bu
David Moreno Garza wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
>>>But my intention was not to read the whole list and do this by hand!
>>>This should be done by the same script which sends the sem automated
>>>mails to the BTS.
>>
>>As there is a consensus that it is a goo
Hi David!
You wrote:
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
> tomorrow noon-, by tomorrow night). I'll point to documentatio
David Moreno Garza @ 2005-09-13 (Tuesday), 18:06 (-0500)
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight
Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
> has diseappeared.
> Old ITPs should be turned into RFPs, not closed.
I don't agree. If there's no current interest in having the package
created, having the bug open actually
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
>>has diseappeared.
>
> The spectacular amount of clutter they provide -- rendering the wnpp bug list
> unreadable unless you ignore them all -- combined
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:47 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
> has diseappeared.
>
> Old ITPs should be turned into RFPs, not closed.
Well, actually the wnpp bugs are probably the dirtiest part on the BTS:
Understanding dirti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
>has diseappeared.
The spectacular amount of clutter they provide -- rendering the wnpp bug list
unreadable unless you ignore them all -- combined with their total
uselessness? Seems like a pair of go
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
> tomorrow noon-, by tomorrow night).
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > But my intention was not to read the whole list and do this by hand!
> > This should be done by the same script which sends the sem automated
> > mails to the BTS.
>
> As there is a consensus that it is a good idea to close long-inactiv
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 20:36, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Maybe some usertags-hack?
>
> That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
> 'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
>
> [1] http://wi
Hi,
* Mohammed Adnène Trojette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 22:21]:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Maybe some usertags-hack?
>
> That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
> 'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
>
> [1] http
* Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 21:35]:
[ vote for RFPs ]
> > Currently everyone interested in such a package could send a "me too"
> > mail to the report...
> That isn't going to do much good if nobody ever reads them.
>
> For a "me too" thing to be useful, it needs to be immediatel
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 08:06:22PM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 19:11]:
> > > Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> > > which missing packages are most wanted?
> > Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag
> "Radu Spineanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At least something that has the ability to put ITPs,RFPs in separate
>> pages,
>
> You mean like http://www.us.debian.org/devel/wnpp/?
>
Yes, something like that. But change the information shown on each page
depending of the type of wnpp entry.
Fo
* David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 19:11]:
> > Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> > which missing packages are most wanted?
> Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
> work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Curre
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:36 +0200, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> [1] http://wiki.debian.org/WNPPBugsTagging
This is a great work, thanks.
Is there any plan to start using it and tagging?
Cheers,
--
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.damog.net/
<[EMAIL P
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Maybe some usertags-hack?
That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/WNPPBugsTagging
Please no Cc:, I read the list.
--
Mohammed Adn
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:06 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> > Maybe it would a good idea to create a new web interface for the wnpp bugs.
> > At least something that has the ability to put ITPs,RFPs in separate
> > pages,
>
> You mean like http://www.us.debian.org/devel/wnpp/?
But the prop
Re: David Moreno Garza in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
> work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Maybe some usertags-hack? But then, the people who know how that works
could as well package the RFP themselves...
Christoph
--
[
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:05 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> which missing packages are most wanted?
Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Cheers,
"Radu Spineanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
>> suggest software to be packaged?
>>
>> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of some
>> 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I have
Alexander Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
> * Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 02:46]:
> [ long RFPs ]
>> Or don't even open RFP bugs in the first place because they're
>> thoroughly useless?
>
> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
> suggest s
> Hi!
>
> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
> suggest software to be packaged?
>
> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of some
> 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I have some
> time - it's just that it's difficu
[Alexander Schmehl]
> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of
> some 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I
> have some time - it's just that it's difficult to look at so many
> wnpps.
I agree. There are packages I would like to assist into the archi
Hi!
* Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 02:46]:
[ long RFPs ]
> Or don't even open RFP bugs in the first place because they're
> thoroughly useless?
Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
suggest software to be packaged?
I don't think RFPs per se are useles
Scripsit Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 10:37]:
>> There was a discussion about closing old RFPs on -project in the middle
>> of July (around the 13th, I think). I really should get acting on the
>> consensus of that thread and close the old RFPs.
Hi,
* Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 10:37]:
> ti, 2005-09-13 kello 01:45 +0200, Alexander Schmehl kirjoitti:
> > Close RFP after ... uhm... let's say 1 year inactivity and send the
> > submitter an apology, that we couldn't find a volunteer for the
> > requested package, should to
Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
>> Hi,
>> If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
>> open bugs which are very very old.
>> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
>> automatically after the t
ti, 2005-09-13 kello 01:45 +0200, Alexander Schmehl kirjoitti:
> Close RFP after ... uhm... let's say 1 year inactivity and send the
> submitter an apology, that we couldn't find a volunteer for the
> requested package, should to very well.
There was a discussion about closing old RFPs on -project
* Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 00:47]:
> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> automatically after the third semi automatic notice mail
> which is sent to the BTS entry?
What is the purpose of this mail? Either there is someone interested in
packaging it, or you won't
Hi,
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 01:07]:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Hi,
> > If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
> > open bugs which are very very old.
> > Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> > aut
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
> If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
> open bugs which are very very old.
> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> automatically after the third semi automatic notice mail
> which is sent to
Hi,
If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
open bugs which are very very old.
Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
automatically after the third semi automatic notice mail
which is sent to the BTS entry?
Regards Nico
--
Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
43 matches
Mail list logo
