Re: Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye

2022-08-18 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Carnil, On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 09:38:27PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Sort of. Just for exanding the context, there is a note about it in > https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.en.html#limited-security-support thanks, I've added openjdk-17 to secu

Re: Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye

2022-08-17 Thread Holger Levsen
hi, as both openjdk-11 and openjdk-17 have received security updates and as I understand this very bug report, we can close this bug as nothing regarding the security-status of openjdk-(11|17) in bullseye needs to be documented right now, as they are both supported. Assuming this is correct, I'm

Re: libspring-java support

2022-04-02 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Sylvain, On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 12:06:40PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote: > Holger, can you clarify if you want the LTS team to handle > debian-security-support backports to stretch, or if you intend to do it > yourself? thanks for asking, I'd be glad for more people maintaining debian-securi

Re: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye

2022-02-03 Thread Holger Levsen
hi, almost exactly a year ago... On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 11:59:23AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > So I'm going with option 1, preparing for an openjdk-17 in bullseye, and > preparing release notes and notes for security support. This is more > conservative than option 2, but allows to do better

Re: Bug#975016: Python 2 / OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye

2020-11-18 Thread Holger Levsen
clone 975016 -1 tags -1 -moreinfo retitle 975016 OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye retitle -1 Python 2 support state for Bullseye # thanks and sorry for the noise, should have done the split immediatly :) -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|

Re: Bug#975016: Python 2 / OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye

2020-11-18 Thread Holger Levsen
control: tags -1 +moreinfo On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:20:37PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > > > > openjdk-15Only included for bootstrapping later OpenJDK > > releases > > > > > > One important thing: These only applies to Bullseye and >

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails

2015-10-05 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Emmanuel, On Montag, 5. Oktober 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Thank you very much for the changes. Let's see how it goes, but I > suspect the volume of notifications will be much better and the need for > individual subscriptions less critical. we'll see. you are still subscribed to 1000 diffe

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails

2015-10-02 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Emmanuel, On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > I agree and am wondering if we should actually do this, and limit > > (maintainer) notifications to unstable? What do you think? > Well, if I understood your "this graph is a lie" properly in your talks, > I think the reproduc

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails

2015-09-30 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, (mostly ignoring the rest as this has been addressed already.) On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Markus Koschany wrote: > I understand that everything is still in development. However I don't > think a public mailing list is a suitable testbed. My preferred solution > would be to make receivin

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails

2015-09-29 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Markus Koschany wrote: > I would like to take the opportunity to raise the following concern. I > support the reproducible builds effort but I think the periodic e-mails > to pkg-java are often not useful enough at the moment. There are far too > many false-pos

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails

2015-09-29 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, thanks for explaining, Emmanuel! On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Actually I tend to prefer the reports in unstable. The reports in > testing are often duplicates of issues already known in unstable, and > sometimes they are already fixed in unstable when they are noti

Re: Proposal to do regular jenkins updates via jessie-updates (Was: Re: Removing Jenkins from Jessie)

2015-04-09 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Mittwoch, 8. April 2015, Niels Thykier wrote: > * There are several jenkins-* packages that will (presumably) need to >be updated as often as Jenkins itself. I wondered which packages were "jenkins*" and figured it out with the help from Adam: holger@coccia:~$ dak rm -Rn jenkins Wil

Re: Status of gerrit packaging

2012-10-17 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2012, Thomas Koch wrote: > Holger already had a look at prolog-cafe in August. I finally added an > explanation to README.source about the issue he found (below). You might > ask him whether he wants to hand over the sponsoring of prolog-cafe. I absolutly don't mind i

Re: RFS: prolog-cafe, dependency for Gerrit

2012-06-25 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Sonntag, 24. Juni 2012, Thomas Koch wrote: > Prolog-Cafe is a dependency for the Code Review System Gerrit, RFP: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=589436 > > Prolog-Cafe itself: > > http://mentors.debian.net/package/prolog-cafe > or > http://anonscm.debian.org/git