Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Martín Ferrari"
* Package name: golang-github-kolo-xmlrpc
Version : 0+git20150413.0826b98
Upstream Author : Dmitry Maksimov
* URL : https://github.com/kolo/xmlrpc
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Go
Description
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 08:48:25PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Are we sure on the name? Previous commenters have suggested that
>> "non-free/firmware" might be better. I understand that may be more
>> awkward to implement in terms of directories... :-)
>
> If my re
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> And gives problems: the "Section" field has either just the ${section}
> or ${component}/${section}. If component now also has a "/" in it,
> there will likely be bugs. I don't think aesthetic reasons call for
> this breakage if we can a
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 09:52:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> dak doesn't really like having a package in multiple components: the
> layout of pool/ requires that the files would have to be duplicated.
> Then dak only knows that a "binary package" belongs to a suite, not to
> a given (suite,
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 09:52:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> dak doesn't really like having a package in multiple components: the
>> layout of pool/ requires that the files would have to be duplicated.
>> Then dak only knows that a "binary package" belongs to a
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> So you don't want another component, but something that looks like a
> component in some places only? I.e. it behaves like a component in that
> it gets its own Packages (and Sources?) indices, but it has neither its
> own area in pool/ n
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:43:45PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> > So you don't want another component, but something that looks like a
> > component in some places only? I.e. it behaves like a component in that
> > it gets its own Packages (a
Paul Wise writes:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> So you don't want another component, but something that looks like a
>> component in some places only? I.e. it behaves like a component in that
>> it gets its own Packages (and Sources?) indices, but it has neither it
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I'm pretty sure we don't want to do so in the main archive though as we
> don't want to ship even more (large) indices.
The idea there was smaller cut-down indicies so that not all clients
need to download the (large) full indicies and st
Hi all,
it appears my real-life workload won't come down significantly in the
foreseeable future. Therefore some packages could need some help. I'm not
orphaning anything yet, but I may have to eventually.
Some are team maintained anyway, other can be handed over completely or moved
to team maint
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 10:56:21AM +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
> Your example comparing systemd debate vs abortion debate is definitively
> insane
snip
> ...(at least here in France).
Russ specifically said "in US politics". His analogy was very clearly bracketed
to the situation in the US, *not* i
Hi everyone,
the following packages contain lines matching the
expression:
/var/lib/apt/lists/.*(Packages|Sources)
Those files may be compressed by any compressor
supported by APT and just hardcoding them is
wrong.
Especially with lz4 support in 1.2, there
is almost no overhead setting
On Jan 10 2016, Eric Valette wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
>> For one specific example, it's become quite clear over the past year that
>> systemd has achieved the same status as abortion debates in US politics.
>> Not only is it clear that we will *never* stop arguing about systemd,
>> oppositi
On Jan 09 2016, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> I think the *policy* for this section should be firmware, as defined
> as code not executing on the main CPU, or something like that.
Uh, so intel-microcode is still out?
Description: Processor microcode firmware for Intel CPUs
This package contains
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Fladischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
* Package name: django-redis
Version : 4.3.0
Upstream Author : Andrey Antukh
* URL : https://github.com/niwinz/django-redis
* License : BSD-3-clause
P
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Fladischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
* Package name: django-websocket-redis
Version : 0.4.5
Upstream Author : Jacob Rief
* URL : https://github.com/jrief/django-websocket-redis
* License :
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Fladischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
* Package name: django-watchman
Version : 0.9.0
Upstream Author : Michael Warkentin
* URL : https://github.com/mwarkentin/django-watchman
* License : BS
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬)"
* Package name: libqpsd
Version : 0~20151124
Upstream Author : Ronie Martinez, Yuezhao Huang
* URL : https://github.com/Code-ReaQtor/libqpsd
* License : LGPL-2.1+
Programming Lang: C++
Descripti
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:02:00PM +0100, Tobias Frost wrote:
> we are currently planning to start the transition of libpng.
Is there a repository with packages rebuilt against libpng16? Some
dependency chains are massive, such as the gtk/gdk/... which makes
testing fixes not possible without lar
Hello, let's say I have the following install:
my_metapackage -> depends on windows_manager -> depends on lightdm ->
depends on xorg
So, I am forcing the following:
- xorg
- lightdm
- windows_manager
can I set the configuration files? For instance, can I set the lightdm
config in /etc or the wi
Le lundi 11 janvier 2016, 23:38:10 Stephan Foley a écrit :
> Hello, let's say I have the following install:
>
> my_metapackage -> depends on windows_manager -> depends on lightdm ->
> depends on xorg
>
> can I set the configuration files? For instance, can I set the lightdm
> config in /etc or th
21 matches
Mail list logo
