On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 12:06:15 +0100
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 04:11:35PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > The decision of whether a bug is release-critical or not is for the
> > release managers to make, using the various properties of the bug
> > (including but *not* limited
> From: Don Armstrong
> To: 509732-d...@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#509732: Kalle's message #68
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:53:34 -0800
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
>
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, José Luis González wrote:
> > And can another developer fi
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 02:57:25 -0800
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, José Luis González wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:11:03 -0800
> > Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > It should be filed against debian-policy with the appropriate
> > > severity.
> >
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:11:03 -0800
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008, José Luis González wrote:
> > If you still don't understand, imagine that a text is mistakenly
> > introduced in the Policy and it causes a RC bug. How should this bug
> > about the Policy
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 19:46:36 -0800
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Dec 2008, José Luis González wrote:
> > If a problem is RC, it should be marked as RC. If the BTS manages
> > pseudopackages, a bug in a pseudopackage that is RC should be marked
> > as RC in the BTS.
>
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:29:58 +0200
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > Another bug should be filed on www.debian.org for this.
>
> I disagree. The Policy Manual very clearly states where the policy
> discussion is to take place. There is no need to separately state this
> anywhere in www.debian.org.
>From
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:43:33 +0200
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> José Luis González writes:
> > Do you agree now?
>
> If you mean do I agree that you should file a bug against
> www.debian.org because it doesn't say anything specific about filing
> bugs against Debian
On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:05:17 -0800
Russ Allbery wrote:
> José Luis González writes:
>
> > Package: general
> > Severity: important
> >
[snip removed]
> >
> > I am filing this bug so that this is resolved. According to the
> > description in that file
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:05:15 +0200 Kalle wrote:
> I think what José is reporting is that in his opinion the BTS (and
> actually all pseudopackages available in the BTS) should be considered
> a part of the release and there should be Policy instructions as to
> how the BTS should work
Only with r
9 matches
Mail list logo
