On 30-Mar-01, 17:47 (CST), Brian Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:45:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > + One example of this is if the current version of the
> > + stable and unstable package is 1.2-1, then
> > + a new upload can have 1.2
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:45:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:19:02AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:06:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > Summary:
> > > History:
> > > Technical reasoning:
> > > Issues:
> > > Caveats:
> >
> > But nowher
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 05:36:31PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> This sounds like a good idea. Except only the source code can be
> transfered from stable to unstable (to prevent problems others are
> debating), which will mean:
>
> upload to stable == upload to stable + source only upload to unstable
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 05:39:57PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > "Brian" == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Brian> upload to stable == upload to stable
> Brian> + source only upload to testing
> Brian> + source only upload to unstable
>
> Sorry to followup straight away o
> "Brian" == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brian> upload to stable == upload to stable
Brian> + source only upload to testing
Brian> + source only upload to unstable
Sorry to followup straight away on my previous post, however I
just thought of something.
What problem wo
> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes:
Anthony> So, rather than uploading to "stable unstable", you
Anthony> upload just to "stable", and the change automatically
Anthony> gets propogated to unstable (and/or testing), unless
Anthony> there's a newer version already there.
This
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:06:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Policy should disallow uploads for multiple distributions. Specifically
> this means same version uploads to "stable unstable".
What if instead of doing it like this, we made an effort to make it *more*
convenient, rather than less?
S
Hi,
Looking at the original bug report, the history section seems
to detail implementation flaws in buildd's and dinstall, and the
major motivation for this proposal seems to ber a workaround for the
shortcomings of the dinstall+buildd system. I think this motivation
is bogus, we shoul
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:45:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> - frozen
> + testing
I don't think any conclusion has yet been reached about whether or not
we will have some sort of frozen distro during the freeze. So I'm
unsure whether we should make this change as sug
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 09:00:02PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > IMHO, the fundamental and unavoidable reason why we have this problem
> > is the following:
>
> > We don't know in which Packages files (=distributions) a
> > single binary is (used
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> IMHO, the fundamental and unavoidable reason why we have this problem
> is the following:
> We don't know in which Packages files (=distributions) a
> single binary is (used or) going to be used.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I thought the wh
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 03:57:16PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> This is a different issue. Besides, you won't solve it by
> >> gettint people to do different uploads since they can compile
> >> both on stable (some developers
> "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> This is a different issue. Besides, you won't solve it by
>> gettint people to do different uploads since they can compile
>> both on stable (some developers only run stable machines
>> immediately after a release). What y
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:06:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> It's my opinion that same version uploads to stable/unstable are harful
> to archive and distribution integrity.
There is a deep reason why this makes sense, but I think you didn't mention
it explicitely. The reasons you mentioned are
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 03:09:54PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 21-Mar-01, 11:45 (CST), Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > @@ -1434,15 +1434,23 @@
> >
> >
> >
> > - frozen
> > + testing
>^^^
>
> But la
On 21-Mar-01, 11:45 (CST), Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> @@ -1434,15 +1434,23 @@
>
>
>
> - frozen
> + testing
^^^
But later wrote:
> + is a time constraint before migration. Note
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:31:18AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:37:56AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Remember that the majority of uploads to stable are done by the security
> > team and the buildd's. I don't think this is a lot of effort for the
> > maintainers, since it
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 03:58:44PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:31:18AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> > And as I said in my previous message, for libraries with the soname
> > (like glibc), you do want to test it against old -dev packages to ensure
> > binary compatibility.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:37:56AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Remember that the majority of uploads to stable are done by the security
> team and the buildd's. I don't think this is a lot of effort for the
> maintainers, since it isn't done often enough to be cumbersome, like it
> would have been
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:45:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> diff -urN debian-policy-3.5.2.0.orig/policy.sgml
> debian-policy-3.5.2.0/policy.sgml
[snip]
Seconded.
--
G. Branden Robinson |Software engineering: that part of
Debian GNU/Linux|computer science w
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:19:02AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:06:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Summary:
> > History:
> > Technical reasoning:
> > Issues:
> > Caveats:
>
> But nowhere did you have the actual text of a policy change. This is
> needed.
>
> Plea
Remember that the majority of uploads to stable are done by the security
team and the buildd's. I don't think this is a lot of effort for the
maintainers, since it isn't done often enough to be cumbersome, like it
would have been for "frozen unstable" uploads.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 07:38:08PM +1
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Ben Collins wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
>
> Summary:
>
> Policy should disallow uploads for multiple distributions. Specifically
> this means same version uploads to "stable unstable".
Summary: I object.
> [...]
> Technical reasoning:
>
> 1) Building for "stable unstable
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Running a buildd, I have the problem of builds that come in for stable
> and unstable. Currently this means the buildd performs the compile on
> stable, and either uploads to "stable unstable", or as it were
Is there a reason why this option won't work?
>
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:06:02PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Summary:
> History:
> Technical reasoning:
> Issues:
> Caveats:
But nowhere did you have the actual text of a policy change. This is
needed.
Please write one up and I'll second it.
--
G. Branden Robinson | If a man
Package: debian-policy
Summary:
Policy should disallow uploads for multiple distributions. Specifically
this means same version uploads to "stable unstable".
History:
Running a buildd, I have the problem of builds that come in for stable
and unstable. Currently this means the buildd performs
26 matches
Mail list logo
