On 15077 March 1977, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> - July 7th
>> - July 14th
>> Are people available for either or both of those dates?
> The 7th is looking like the favourite so far (although would mean
> freezing next weekend), but we still need an ftp-master (N)ACK on
> either / both date.
No way f
On 14931 March 1977, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> HOWEVER... those dates clash with another group already booked in at
> the LinuxHotel in Essen. So we've started talking to people in Fulsa
> as a fallback option. We have a tentative space for a venue and now we
> need to book hotel rooms. So... If you
On 14866 March 1977, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> =
> a) your willingness to take part in this sprint
> b) your availability to travel for this sprint
> c) ideas on when/where we could meet up, if you have any
>
Am 19.08.2013 15:55, schrieb Julien Cristau:
we should start thinking about dates for the 7.2 and 6.0.8 point
releases. Which week-ends in the coming months would work for
ftpmaster, press and cd? (We'd need one date for stable and another
later for oldstable.)
We COULD do both at once, at l
>> Your decision. However, as backports is now the same dak instance as the
>> main archive, -master should be able to find a way to make this without
>> the overhead.
> You mean, simply copying the testing packages into backports if their
> dependencies are met within stable+backports? That woul
>> > I wonder what we (as Debian) could do about it. Would it make sense to
>> > sponsor a very fast machine that the kernel team could use to build the
>> > kernels and upload from, replacing kernel-archive.buildserver.net ?
>> The easiest fix is the official blessing by the ftp team to upload onl
On 11245 March 1977, Frederik Schueler wrote:
>> missing source for scnap/doc/csnap.ps
> This is going to be funny.
> A ps2txt dump of it is not enough source, is it? ;-)
Only if you can, somehow, make me believe that that is what upstream
used to write it. But as I dont take drugs and also do
Hi Maintainer,
rejected, your debian/copyright points to the GPL symlink, but you have
files licensed as GPLv2 only, ie. not with the "or any later" option. As
the GPL symlink points to GPLv3 your copyright file is wrong. Please
fix.
Also: your debian/copyright file is incomplete and misses
(C)ho
On 11140 March 1977, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>> I don't consider it something needing fixing.
>> It is a good way to have the copyright files occasionally reviewed.
> I don't think that old source packages are re-reviewed for copyright
> violations/non-freeness. But I could easily be wrong.
Those
On 11140 March 1977, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> You're not checking for copyright violations or for non-free stuff in
> all other packages.
I wonder what I did to all those thousands of packages I had in NEW in
the past.
> IMHO, it's not the ftp-master's job to check with each upload if a
> numbe
On 11140 March 1977, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I'm not sure I can take the Debian kernel team seriously any more.
What team? We dont seem to have a team.
> The most recent linux-source-2.6.22 contains the following files:
[...]
> In other words, *all* of the above drivers. It's even worse than
Hi Maintainer,
rejected, your debian/copyright misses to mention the .bdf files
that are not GPL.
--
bye Joerg
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subj
as requested
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10639 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
>> Right now, with no deep insight into the kernel team, this package is
>> rejected,
>> as it looks like an addition to unstable that shouldnt be there. Of
>> course you are free to (try to) convince me or other ftp-teamler to
>> accept it.
> Have you cons
Hi Maintainer,
rejected for now.
>From an IRC chat with waldi my understanding is that this package is intended
to do some development on linux-2.6 kernel images, that arent in unstables
linux-2.6 package yet, but are in the linux-2.6 in the experimental
linux-2.6 package.
As the -exp package isn
As requested
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Horms schrieb:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:14:30PM -0700, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>>Broken
> Does anyone in the kernel team know whats up here?
-4 is already in, so not important. :)
(Was a request from uploader to kick it because its broken...)
--
bye Joerg
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
Broken
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As requested
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
19 matches
Mail list logo
