Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: peercast
Version : 0.1211+svn
Upstream Author : PeerCast Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.peercast.org
* License : GPL
Description : P2P aud
Le Mardi 6 Décembre 2005 02:50, Joe Smith a écrit :
> Now it is useless for users where the bottleneck is on their end.
Well, it can also be usefull in case of a broken mirror can't it?
Romain
--
Not even the dog
That piss against the wall of Babylon,
Shall escape his judgement
Le Jeudi 19 Janvier 2006 08:48, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
> For those following along at home, it seems klik is some sort of
> gateway to install Debian packages on various non-Debian distributions.
> I imagine it's an ftp frontend to alien.
Well..
In fact, it is a scripted version of apt that ca
Le Jeudi 19 Janvier 2006 09:57, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> No where in his web page is written that in fact klik is a refactoring of
> actual debian packages.
Ok I was wrong it is written in small at the end:
"Thanks to debian for the software compilation and packaging."
Romain
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: php-getid3
Version : 1.7.5
Upstream Author : James Heinrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.getid3.org/
* License : GPL
Description : PHP4
Le Mercredi 8 Février 2006 22:14, Daniel Baumann a écrit :
> I'm working on the rest of the helix-tools and real-player too. I'm in
> contact with Real to fix the helix-player license and to get an
> acceptable license for real-player for its inclusion into non-free.
> Unfortunately, such things ta
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: geekast
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Frédéric Logier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gna.org/projects/geekast/
* License : GPL
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: kshutdown
Version : 0.6.0
Upstream Author : Konrad Twardowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://kshutdown.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Descript
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: waste
Version : 1.5b3
Upstream Author : Waste Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://waste.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Description : Software
Le Vendredi 13 Mai 2005 12:18, vous avez écrit :
> I took a quick look at the code and found it may require DFSG actions.
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/waste/waste/license.cpp?rev=1.1&view=
>auto that arrays are either the GPL license itself, backdoor code (who
> knows, I didn't try to
n that, I cannot intent to include it into the debian distribution.
I'm looking forward for your answers,
Romain Beauxis
--
If you are the big tree,
We are the small axe,
Ready to cut you down,
Sharpen to cut you down
pgpWVhwlGWmb9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> If it where used I would suggest replacing it with
> #include "/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL" (or a file inside the source)
> and patch to make it use plain text instead of crypted data.
Yep in fact it was used as it said, by using the -L switch for both wastesrv
and the admin command
wastes
Package: wnpp
Followup-For: Bug #294397
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi!
I had already tried to package it few mounths ago, for my first try...
So that was not that clean.. ;)
Now I'm restarting from scratch, and I will do the following packages:
-- mediabox404-web: p
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ptunnel
Version : 0.61
Upstream Author : Daniel Stoedle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cs.uit.no/~daniels/PingTunnel/
* License : BSD like
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: mediawiki-extensions
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : collection of extensions from the net
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : GPL, public domain and &quo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: jbidwatcher
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Morgan Schweers, CyberFOX <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.jbidwatcher.com/
* License : LGPL
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ov519
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.rastageeks.org/ov51x-jpeg
* License : GPL
Description :
On Thursday 07 December 2006 11:06, Sebastian Dröge wrote:
> > The number of packages which are still using the 0.8 series of
> > GStreamer has dropped significantly. Remain as libgstreamer0.8-0
> > rdeps:
Seems that you do not include some other packages not directly depending on
this lib.
On Thursday 07 December 2006 12:03, Loïc Minier wrote:
> Initially missing from the list: geekast-binary. The maintainer
> commented that he is now working on porting this package to GStreamer
> 0.10.
Ok, it seems that the issue is more complicated than that.
Indeed, the while ruby-gnome2 bind
Le jeudi 7 décembre 2006 16:33, Sjoerd Simons a écrit :
> ruby-gnome2 only contains bindings for gstreamer 0.8. To use gstreamer 0.10
> you need the libgstreamer0.10-ruby1.8 package. Which works perfectly with
> the rest of ruby-gnome2 :)
Thanks forthis point, I did not knew it !
> > When ruby-gn
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: lastfmproxy
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Vidar Madsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://vidar.gimp.org/lastfmproxy/
* License : GPL
Programming
On Friday 05 May 2006 11:24, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > It seems to me that Ubuntu is getting alot more out of their friendship
> > with Debian, than Debian gets out of Ubuntu. Anyone have comments on
> > this? Please correct me if I'm wrong, and examples would be great.
> > Does Debian get lots of
Hi all!
On Monday 15 May 2006 14:15, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > this is a dream. This also need that the application is able to deal
> > with the fact that it has configuration for the 32 and 64 bits version
> > coexisting cleanly.
>
> True. Did I say that it would be trivial?
> Or even
On Tuesday 16 May 2006 17:53, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> However, you can take this idea further: provided you have multiarched
> binaries, you could create a small file system using FUSE that generates
> such a wrapper on-the-fly based on the requested file name, and you
> could mount this file system
Hi!
Le Dimanche 21 Mai 2006 19:34, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> PS: Yeah I'm a bit pissed of that we only have people criticizing when we
> do great things.
I know I shouldn't, but I was really upset by your answer.
I'm happy that people speak up and claim their fear with this licence, an
Hi!
On Monday 22 May 2006 13:35, you wrote:
> They won't sue us for distributing Java. If they do, all we have to do
> is point the Judge to the press coverage of this change of license, and
> to the fact that Debian was mentioned as one of the distributors asked
> to please distribute Jav
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: dotclear
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : Olivier Meunier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.dotclear.net/
* License : GPL
Description : simple a
Le Jeudi 29 Septembre 2005 01:20, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> Can libstdc++ be built against uclibc? You're going to have a hard time
> basing a Debian port on uclibc without it.
Hi all!
It may be a stupid question, but I'm wondering if it would be usefull to use
uclibc++[1] instead of libstdc++
Le Jeudi 29 Septembre 2005 19:41, vous avez écrit :
> I saw this library today... I'm not so sure if it will solve the
> question, as it's still alpha... Did anybody used it in a production
> environment?
Well, I knew the existence of this library from the openwrt[1] distribution.
Maybe you can as
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-magic
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Christophe Troestler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/ocaml-magic/
* License : LGPL+Li
Le Monday 25 February 2008 15:58:16 nic, vous avez écrit :
> hi together,
>
> I'm not quite sure how to properly use this debian-list (I should have
> read before, I know...).
>
> I spontaneously thought of an ant: It works hard, it's tough, well, and
> with a fat grin on its face. just a first ide
Le Tuesday 26 February 2008 14:41:41 Nico Golde, vous avez écrit :
> > Fine. I have other arguments: it would make it "yet another FOSS
> > project with an animal mascot".
>
> I strongly agree, also because we already have a logo it
> would be nice if the new fancy logo would be related to the
> ex
Le Friday 29 February 2008 11:16:04 Thijs Kinkhorst, vous avez écrit :
> There are several costs associated with having yet another package doing
> the same thing:
> * For the project in general, it costs archive and Packages file space,
> build time, QA efforts just to name a few;
You're mixing d
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 16:43:56 Ron Johnson, vous avez écrit :
> > I wish we had some more of this sort of thinking in our own project and a
> > little less of yours. Maybe then we'd have fewer bugs in the packages
> > people actually care about and use.
>
> I say we drop every WM & DE except GN
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 17:37:40 David Nusinow, vous avez écrit :
> > Basically, a package has bugs because the maintainer or upstream is not
> > reponsive/available/..., not because there are too much *choice*.
>
> Um. No. We have lots of people. We also have lots of software. If we lose
> some
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 17:44:01 Thijs Kinkhorst, vous avez écrit :
> On Saturday 1 March 2008 17:20, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > It is also pointed out that there are central places, like security
> > fixes, where having too many packages leads to too much work. Sure, but
>
Le Saturday 01 March 2008 19:48:50 Christian Perrier, vous avez écrit :
> If someone cares to listen: when you think about ITPing each and every
> piece of FLOSS that pops around: think about *helping* people who
> maintain existing packages instead of adding even more noise to our
> noisy bunch of
Le Thursday 13 March 2008 15:32:18 John Goerzen, vous avez écrit :
> > Right. But currently, this has a good chance to keep Triggers out of
> > lenny, which is a bloody shame.
>
> I understand, which is my point. People need to get a sense of
> perspective. What is the more important goal: trigg
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-duppy
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Le Thursday 20 March 2008 18:58:00 Artur R. Czechowski, vous avez écrit :
> So what should be the proper way to allow switching between ATI and Debian
> debs with drivers?
The packages are never to be compatible or upgradable.
To be more clear, we should even renamed them at some point.
The prope
Le Sunday 23 March 2008 10:27:00 Rafael Laboissiere, vous avez écrit :
> [I am moving this discussion into debian-devel, in order to get advise from
> the other developers. Please, respect the M-F-T header.]
>
> The discussion below is about Bug#472048. I would like to know from people
> using lib
Le Wednesday 26 March 2008 16:35:51 Mike Bird, vous avez écrit :
> The next DPL should have a solid plan for reversing Debian's decline.
> If this means that some architectures fall by the wayside for lack of
> interest then so be it. Better to lose several 0.1% architectures
> than for Debian as
Le Thursday 27 March 2008 21:54:24 Julien BLACHE, vous avez écrit :
> Faidon Liambotis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In your position, I'd probably be afraid of receiving the "Joerg
> > Schilling award".
>
> The "Sven Luther award" may be more appropriate; time will tell.
Can you stop posting suc
Le Sunday 06 April 2008 00:08:43 Roger Leigh, vous avez écrit :
> > The foo package's build dependencies are only relevant when building the
> > foo package. For someone who develops software based on libbar, it is
> > not obvious that foo's build dependencies are required.
>
> As an upstream, I in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-faad
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Le Wednesday 16 April 2008 15:44:56 Neil Williams, vous avez écrit :
> An upload of a new application is nowhere near as complex as the upload
> to start a library SONAME transition. Even uploading a new library never
> seen in Debian before is easier than starting a SONAME transition for a
> libra
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-bjack
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL + link exception
Prog
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name : oss4
Version : 4.0
Upstream Author : 4Front Technologies
* URL : http://www.4front-tech.com/developer/sources/stable/gpl/
* License : GPL
Programming L
Hi !
Le Tuesday 03 June 2008 08:53:59 Klaus Ethgen, vous avez écrit :
> By the way I would like it too to see oss4 in debian as alsa is not
> usable at all. (Please feel free to have flame me about by private mail;
> this is just my experience/opinion.)
No problem to join the packaging ef
Le Monday 16 June 2008 07:31:49 William Pitcock, vous avez écrit :
> With grub being stable and grub2 approaching stability itself, do we
> really need lilo anymore? It's not even installed by default anymore,
> and the only systems I have that are still on lilo are installations of
> Debian I have
Le Monday 16 June 2008 12:03:09 Michael Banck, vous avez écrit :
> > On some of my boxes all filesystems are on LVMs and the Debian installer
> > used lilo to boot the systems. It would be nice if these systems can
> > still be used with future Debian versions. Please remove lilo only if
> > there'
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libv4l
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: C
Le lundi 10 août 2009 09:58:04, Jonathan Yu a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33:58AM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >> > The dh_make template for debian/copyright induces many
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 04:59:09, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
> package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
> which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release, by
> forbidding the too old
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 23:22:45, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Romain Beauxis writes:
> > But there could be another use of this field, which would fit into the
> > test- driven workflow. What about a tool that displays the changes in
> > the policy based on the declared supp
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:09:09, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
> Romain Beauxis (12/08/2009):
> > Is it foolish to propose this as a lintian check ? "Hey, standards
> > version is outdated, here are the changes that ought to be done"
>
> checks/standards-version.desc
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:31:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> Please file a bug (and patch) against lintian, I doubt the lintian
> maintainers would have a problem with this as long as it is
> implemented sanely.
Ok. Are the .desc files processed in any way ?
I looked at lintian's source and could find an
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 01:13:44, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:31:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> > Please file a bug (and patch) against lintian, I doubt the lintian
> > maintainers would have a problem with this as long as it is
> > implemented sanely.
>
&
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:48:13, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> > That makes a difference in the sense that it helps to improve the
> > workflow by putting as much information as possible in the same place.
>
> Oh, for Pete's sake, just run zless on the file lintian already
> reports for you.
Le samedi 29 août 2009 09:29:30, Ben Finney a écrit :
> If the governing interpretation is that “all copyright notices and
> distribution license” need to be duplicated into the file, how many
> packages in Debian are violating policy by this reading? More to the
> point, does this interpretation a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-cry
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : Low-level OCaml implementation
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cwiid
Version : 0.3.51
Upstream Author : L. Donnie Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.wiili.org/index.php/CWiid
* License : GPL
Program
Le jeudi 18 janvier 2007 19:21, Julien Cristau a écrit :
> Hi,
Hi !
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 18:57:41 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > CWiid is a Linux interface to the Wiimote written in C.
>
> is there any reason this needs to be mentioned in the package
> descrip
Le samedi 17 février 2007 05:42, Kobayashi Noritada a écrit :
> * Package name : libwiimote
> Version : 0.3
> Upstream Author : Joel Andersson
> Chad Phillips
> * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwiimote/
> * License : GPL
> Descrip
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: transfermii
Version : 0.3.1
Upstream Author : Arnaud Ysmal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.stacktic.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Samuel Mimram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-ao
Version : 0.1.6
Upstream Author : the Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description
Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 14:11, Maik Merten a écrit :
> > Fortunately not. We have free MPEG-4 decoders, thanks.
>
> I don't consider this to be true.
>
> Can you give a source supporting your theory?
Well, check for mpeg4 decoders in main archive..
I think you are missunderstanding his point, bec
Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 14:46, Maik Merten a écrit :
> Romain Beauxis schrieb:
> > Well, check for mpeg4 decoders in main archive..
> > I think you are missunderstanding his point, because a patent is not
> > directly related to the freeness of the code.
> > If we were
Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 16:10, Maik Merten a écrit :
> If somehow possible the WHATWG should adopt a free format and I think
> it's in the best interest of Debian to bringing this to the WHATWG's
> attention.
I don't agree, you'll always have the threat of an abusing patent that claims
that some
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 09:31, Michal Čihař a écrit :
> Same here, tried encrypted first, it failed (see bellow), then
> unencrypted and it worked fine.
Precisly the same issue here.
It has been reported to work on mutt, and it failed here with kmail.
Is the crypt+sign mail format standard ?
Ro
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 15:16, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> I'm obviousely hit by two broken MUAs (pine, mailx) and not
> willing to spend more then 10 minutes just to send my vote.
Plus kmail I think.
Romain
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: spip
Version : 1.9.2b
Upstream Author : SPIP Development Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.spip.net/ and
http://trac.rezo.net/trac/spi
Hi !
Le Saturday 26 May 2007 13:03:09 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit :
> This was already in the archive and has been removed mostly for
> it's poor security track record. Re-introducing it is a very
> bad idea.
I've been trought the previous spip bugs, and it seems that missing secu
Le Tuesday 29 May 2007 23:12:53 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit :
> Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > However, I'll contact them and ask for their commitment to solving
> > seciruty issues, but I'm quite sure that the main issue remains in the
> > hand of the maint
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: json-wheel
Version : 1.0.4
Upstream Author : Martin Jambon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://martin.jambon.free.fr/json-wheel.html
* License : BSD
Prog
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: json-static
Version : 0.9.6
Upstream Author : Martin Jambon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://martin.jambon.free.fr/json-static.html
* License : BSD
Prog
Le Tuesday 21 October 2008 13:10:28 Peter Clifton, vous avez écrit :
> Having no source-code for firmware is hardly that different to having a
> completely open-source driver which does un-told magic by poking
> un-documented registers in a complex chip. Think Intel graphics before
> they released
Le Tuesday 21 October 2008 22:28:31 Lennart Sorensen, vous avez écrit :
> > If I recall well, one of the origin of the GNU fondation was the fact
> > that having free drivers alowed one to actually *fix* issues he may have
> > with his *own* hardware. Then, the very same reasoning can apply to
> >
Le Saturday 25 October 2008 10:56:56 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Could you please elaborate here? The DFSG does not require us to have or
> > ship source code for non-program works, and if documentation is being
> > rejected on the basis of a *
Le Saturday 25 October 2008 18:36:33 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and
> > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce,
> > distribute
Le Wednesday 29 October 2008 11:17:57 Norbert Preining, vous avez écrit :
> Anyone with a decent intelligent approach would ask the list masters,
> admins, whoever, and NOT post again on debian-devel.
I think that Charles meant that, even though someone makes a naive request for
which you -- and
Le Friday 28 November 2008 23:57:09 Holger Levsen, vous avez écrit :
> On Friday 28 November 2008 22:42, William Pitcock wrote:
> > I think issues like these call for an unsupported repository outside of
> > Debian, but publicized within the community as an unofficial repository
> > for things like
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: liq-contrib
Version : 08.11
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL v2+
Programming Lang
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 09:55:24 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> "Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is the NEW queue going to get processed any time soon? There's a load
> > of packages that are 3 weeks or more old.
>
> The NEW queue is constantly being processed. Unfortun
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 12:07:51 Cyril Brulebois, vous avez écrit :
> Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (03/12/2008):
> > I've always wondered why it is not possible to add meta information to
> > an upload.
> > […]
> > In these cases, it would be n
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 13:34:06 Lucas Nussbaum, vous avez écrit :
> That's not true. We imposed that reviewing step to ourselves, and, if
> it's doing more harm (by slowing down development and annoying
> contributors) than good (by detecting mistakes and improving Debian's
> overall quality
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 14:36:39 Miriam Ruiz, vous avez écrit :
> > If people feel that a reviewing service is needed, we could split
> > that out of NEW processing and have a separate service (or just use
> > debian-mentors@ and http://mentors.debian.net).
>
> Yup, I agree with you. I think
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 16:33:15 Martin Wuertele, vous avez écrit :
> > Quality checks could be done later and this would ease the whole process
> > while keeping a focus where it is important.
>
> I completely disagree. It's a welcome benefit if packages of inferior
> quality are prevented f
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 22:15:50 Joerg Jaspert, vous avez écrit :
> Packages that only add new binary components are already sorted above
> packages that have completly new source, to decrease their time in the
> queue, as their checks are much faster done than a complete source
> review. But
Le Sunday 14 December 2008 21:19:35 Andreas Barth, vous avez écrit :
> > FD will be a mess, but as I've previously posted, I believe that means
> > that we fail to override a delegate decision and hence the release of
> > lenny proceeds.
>
> Though I agree with that, voting for option 4 is even mor
Le Monday 15 December 2008 10:36:50 Robert Millan, vous avez écrit :
> > With these hopefully solid plans in place for the release, we feel the
> > need to acknowledge that there is an ongoing vote whose outcome could
> > potentially disrupt them.
>
> Luk is referring to 11 bugs in linux-2.6 which
Le Monday 15 December 2008 23:19:55 Bastian Venthur, vous avez écrit :
> > Note that forking+stable'izing Sid is what Ubuntu does every six months.
>
> Is that important? Unstable is frozen for nearly 1/2 year now, that's a
> problem we should try to solve if we don't want to degrade ourselves to
>
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 00:29:21 Didier Raboud, vous avez écrit :
> > You can't get both recent *and* stabilized software. For a solid release
> > to be done, one needs to hold new improvements for a while.
>
> Yes. But there is a bunch of non-DD people that strongly want to use Debian
> and pr
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 16:50:52 Adeodato Simó, vous avez écrit :
> > Where did Steve shorten the discussion period? He did so for the *other*
> > vote, but I haven't seen a thread where he did for this one. (I may have
> > just missed it.)
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/11/msg0
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 16:52:55 Romain Beauxis, vous avez écrit :
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/11/msg00046.html, no?
>
> I don't read "shorten" in this link, only "start".
Woops, sorry I misread "discussion" with "vote&q
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 14:55:29 Didier Raboud, vous avez écrit :
> > I think that the three existing flavours of debian already provide more
> > than is needed to offer comfort for both users with stability needs and
> > users with desire for new software.
>
> Actually, I would agree if you co
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 20:30:22 Thomas Viehmann, vous avez écrit :
> But while you bring it up: I want a Debian where every Developer can
> cough up a minimal commitment to help with releasing. That is what "Have
> you fixed an RC bug today is about?". If all developers had fixed one RC
> bug
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 13:04:24 Russell Coker, vous avez écrit :
> The above article concerns the damage that Josselin's actions cause to the
> Debian project. D-d-a is not that different from other parts of Debian,
> bad behaviour in other forums also hurts the project.
I have that feeling
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 15:45:05 Michael Banck, vous avez écrit :
> > I'd argue about that "official" thing that people have been using to
> > qualify d-d-a. It's an announce list for developers, by
> > developers.
>
> Wrong. While in /theory/ it might be for developers, in /practise/,
> d-d-
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 16:37:38 Johannes Wiedersich, vous avez écrit :
> Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > I'd argue about that "official" thing that people have been using to
> > qualify d-d-a. It's an announce list for developers, by
> > developers. I'm not sure what's official in there. I'd tend to
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
