Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes:
> Am 15.06.2010 21:08, schrieb Russ Allbery:
>> The current DM implementation is weird in that it's dictated by a GR.
>> It might be worth getting a ruling from the project secretary on
>> whether we need another GR to change the details of it (or, better, to
>>
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 21:08, schrieb Russ Allbery:
> The current DM implementation is weird in that it's dictated by a GR. It
> might be worth getting a ruling from the project secretary on whether we
> need another GR to change the details of it (or, better, to make the
> details of it up to existi
Paul Wise writes:
> Ben Finney wrote:
>> The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
>> that only a sponsor can change.
> Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
> feel free to give us dak patches making DM saner. you will be heard.
> (from the #debian-
On Tuesday 15 June 2010 05:42:43 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney
wrote:
> > The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
> > that only a sponsor can change.
>
> Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
>
> feel free to give us
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes:
> [..]
> [ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
>
>> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
>> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
> [..]
>
> Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule than th
David Paleino writes:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
>> > while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at
[Simon Richter, 2010-06-15]
> I don't think it needs to be reflected in the changelog either, as it
> doesn't really concern the packaging as such, but only upload
> permissions (also, if I should set it, then I'd have to write the
> changelog entry, no?).
what about other DDs? I want to have a co
[Mathieu Malaterre, 2010-06-15]
> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
well, it is hard indeed (if you want a new DD for every upload).
Hint: try to ask previous sponsor first!
> I completely unde
On 2010-06-15, Paul Wise wrote:
> This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
> their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
I guess it is unimportant who exactly writes the lines to
debian/control. But the sponsor should definately agree on it being
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
> Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
> packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
Why 5 times?
> - HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling symnlink,
> - arm/armel updated the java package and libraries m
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
[..]
[ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
[..]
Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:14:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
> their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
> further and do not mention that in debian/changelog nor in their RFS
> mail.
That is general
Hello Alexander,
2010/6/14 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl :
> So I think asking for DMUA:Yes while seeking an initial sponsor is just
> plain wrong, as convincing a DD shouldn't be a one timer. I therefore
> ask DMs not to ask to set this flag on the first upload, and DDs not to
> do so.
Apologies I
[I am a DM]
Hi there,
Even this is against the spirit of Debian Maintainer Concept, I
believe this is because people are pragmatic.
Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
- HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling sy
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
> wrote:
>
> > I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
> > while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at the very
> > same time.
>
> Th
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
> that only a sponsor can change.
Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
feel free to give us dak patches making DM saner. you will be heard.
(from the #deb
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
> > I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail
> > bot or LDAP or something else.
>
> Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am
> very unhappy with the way it is currently implemented.
As a De
Le Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:57:57AM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
> * Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
>> I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
>> or LDAP or something else.
>
> Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
> unhappy with th
* Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
or LDAP or something else.
Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
unhappy with the way it is currently implemented.
--
Jakub Wilk
signature.asc
Descript
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
wrote:
> I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
> while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at the very
> same time.
This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
th
Hi!
I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at the very
same time.
While I can certainly understand Maintainers want to upload their
packages ASAP themselves, I would like to point out that I consider that
qui
21 matches
Mail list logo
