Hi tony,
Am 17.02.19 um 21:27 schrieb tony mancill:
[...]
> Assuming the rest of my ratt build is successful, any concerns with an
> upload to unstable referring to 919798? (Are there any other suitable
> options at this point?)
No objections from my side. I don't know a better solution at the m
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 05:48:30PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> Am 17.02.19 um 16:45 schrieb Ingo Bauersachs:
> > Tony, Markus
> >
> >> [...]
> >> Any thoughts on whether we should focus on fixing javadoc generation or
> >> look at other ways to mitigate the FTBFS?
> >
> > I've b
Hi Ingo,
Am 17.02.19 um 16:45 schrieb Ingo Bauersachs:
> Tony, Markus
>
>> [...]
>> Any thoughts on whether we should focus on fixing javadoc generation or
>> look at other ways to mitigate the FTBFS?
>
> I've been notified that weupnp [1] has been marked for autoremoval [2]
> because of this Ja
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 08:22:14PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Am 15.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb tony mancill:
> [...]
> > Any thoughts on whether we should focus on fixing javadoc generation or
> > look at other ways to mitigate the FTBFS?
>
> Like burning all those -doc packages? :)
>
> In my op
Tony, Markus
> [...]
> Any thoughts on whether we should focus on fixing javadoc generation or
> look at other ways to mitigate the FTBFS?
I've been notified that weupnp [1] has been marked for autoremoval [2]
because of this Javadoc thing, while other packages are not, e.g.
servlet-api [3].
Foll
Hi tony!
Am 15.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb tony mancill:
[...]
> Hi Markus,
>
> We independently executed identical experiments, which I'm glad for,
> because I would have wanted some external verification before uploading
> any of this to unstable. (I started building the r-build-deps of
> libplexus
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 10:07:34PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 26.01.19 um 20:07 schrieb tony mancill:
> [...]
> > I'm trying to peel the onion and believe that this is a problem in the
> > maven-javadoc-plugin package. I found the same issue for a project
> > outside of Debian, fo
Hi,
Am 26.01.19 um 20:07 schrieb tony mancill:
[...]
> I'm trying to peel the onion and believe that this is a problem in the
> maven-javadoc-plugin package. I found the same issue for a project
> outside of Debian, for example [1], which refers to a JIRA ticket for that
> plugin [2]. There is a
> so this is not an openjdk error, and should be fixed in the pacakges
> > itself. See
> >
> > 8211916: Javadoc -link makes broken links if module name matches package
> > name
> > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk-updates/jdk11u/rev/66a53d6047d1
> >
> >
.
It a bug in the individual packages or one in javahelper? And what
should be done to fix it?
Best
Ole
On 25.01.19 09:26, Matthias Klose wrote:
> so this is not an openjdk error, and should be fixed in the pacakges itself.
> See
>
> 8211916: Javadoc -link makes broken links if
10 matches
Mail list logo
