Re: DLA documented

2014-07-22 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, (adding listmasters@ to cc: again...) On Freitag, 18. Juli 2014, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > > I don't think we should impose restrictions on the format of the mails. > > I think we absolutly should. We want consistend announcements, don't we? > Not at the price of scaring away occasional LT

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-18 Thread Moritz Mühlenhoff
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:21:13PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Dienstag, 15. Juli 2014, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > I don't think we should impose restrictions on the format of the mails. > > I think we absolutly should. We want consistend announcements, don't we? Not at the price

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-15 Thread Alexander Wirt
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Dienstag, 15. Juli 2014, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > I don't think we should impose restrictions on the format of the mails. > > I think we absolutly should. We want consistend announcements, don't we? > > > If > > we want to welcome main

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-15 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Dienstag, 15. Juli 2014, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > I don't think we should impose restrictions on the format of the mails. I think we absolutly should. We want consistend announcements, don't we? > If > we want to welcome maintainers not part of the LTS team to take care of > packages i

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 06:45:06PM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jul 2014, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 05:06:26PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Alexander Wirt just offered/suggested to reject mails not conforming to a > > > certain subje

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Montag, 14. Juli 2014, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > I thought "signed by a DD" is already a requirement for the LTS announce > list? yes, it is (as Alexander already privatly confirmed). cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Alexander Wirt
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 05:06:26PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Alexander Wirt just offered/suggested to reject mails not conforming to a > > certain subject format (eg including a DLA ID) as well as unsigned mails. > > (I'd > > su

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Moritz Mühlenhoff
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 05:06:26PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > Alexander Wirt just offered/suggested to reject mails not conforming to a > certain subject format (eg including a DLA ID) as well as unsigned mails. > (I'd > suggest to only allow mails signed by keys able to upload.)

Re: DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, Alexander Wirt just offered/suggested to reject mails not conforming to a certain subject format (eg including a DLA ID) as well as unsigned mails. (I'd suggest to only allow mails signed by keys able to upload.) If we want this, we should file a wishlist bug against lists.d.o - do we? IMO

DLA documented

2014-07-14 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, I went ahead and explained LTS and DLA in https://wiki.debian.org/Glossary#LTS and https://wiki.debian.org/Glossary#DLA (and redefined DLA to mean "Debian LTS Advisory...) and also explained DLA ID handling it https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Development cheers, Holger signature.asc