On 2020-06-29 23:55:49 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote:
[...]
> nodepool from OpenStack,
Well, *formerly* from OpenStack, these days Nodepool is a component
of the Zuul project gating system, which is developed by an
independent project/community (still represented by the OSF):
https://zu
On 6/29/20 7:35 PM, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
>> Running the script shows that 279 reverse (build?) dependencies are
>> affected by mock. This clearly isn't something one wants to run on a
>> personal computer, and even less a test which one wants to run sequentially.
>
> Haha, right.
> What we (me and
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 8:24 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Nice! Thanks a lot for the pointer.
\o/
> I very much agree with you that the debate has to be emptied from
> emotions if possible. My goal has never been to point finger at anyone,
> but try to fix a reoccurring situation which I w
> Running the script shows that 279 reverse (build?) dependencies are
> affected by mock. This clearly isn't something one wants to run on a
> personal computer, and even less a test which one wants to run sequentially.
>
> Has any thought went into having some kind of runners running on a cloud
>
Hi,
so 13. 6. 2020 v 12:18 odesílatel Nilesh Patra napsal:
> Hi,
> I'm interested in joining DPMT
>
welcome :)
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
Hi,
st 24. 6. 2020 v 11:27 odesílatel Michael Hanke napsal:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to join DPMT,
welcome :)
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
Hi,
so 27. 6. 2020 v 15:30 odesílatel Jerome Charaoui
napsal:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to request to join the Python Applications team.
>
welcome :)
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
On 6/29/20 2:33 PM, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> There exists such a thing which I use daily: ruby-team/meta[1].
> The meta/build script is (hopefully and exactly) what we need here!
>
> It checks all the reverse(-build)-dependencies and lets you know what's
> going to break as soon as you dput.
Hi Utk
On Monday, June 29, 2020 7:53:46 AM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 6/29/20 12:58 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On June 29, 2020 10:12:49 AM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> On 6/29/20 8:34 AM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> >>> nope, this is not true. Using the newest debhelper compat level is
> >>> recomme
On Monday, June 29, 2020 10:17:57 AM EDT Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >>> More over, mock debhelper was upgraded to 13, for no apparent
> >>
> >> reason
> >>
> >>> (yet another "cosmetic fix" that isn't helping?). I'd like to
> >>
> >> remind
> >>
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020, Scott Kitterman wrote:
More over, mock debhelper was upgraded to 13, for no apparent
reason
(yet another "cosmetic fix" that isn't helping?). I'd like to
remind
everyone that, increasing debhelper compat version to a number
that
isn't in stable, without
Hi
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 8:41 AM Michael Hanke wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:27 AM Michael Hanke wrote:
> > I would like to join DPMT, specifically to provide a Debian package for
> > annexremote (https://bugs.debian.org/963593).
>
> The package is ready. Would it be acce
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:29 PM Sandro Tosi wrote:
> OS is *just* another software we package for
> Debian; is it complex? sure, but it's not special, and it doesnt
> warrant any special treatment.
I am afraid when you say this.
First of all, that's not completely true. But I don't want to go th
On 6/29/20 12:58 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On June 29, 2020 10:12:49 AM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 6/29/20 8:34 AM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
>>> nope, this is not true. Using the newest debhelper compat level is
>>> recommended, see man page. There is no reason to __not__ upgrade
>>> debhelper
Hi again,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:27 AM Michael Hanke wrote:
> I would like to join DPMT, specifically to provide a Debian package for
> annexremote (https://bugs.debian.org/963593).
The package is ready. Would it be acceptable, if I upload it to NEW with
```
Maintainer: Debian Python Module
On June 29, 2020 10:12:49 AM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 6/29/20 8:34 AM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
...
>> More over, mock debhelper was upgraded to 13, for no apparent
>reason
>> (yet another "cosmetic fix" that isn't helping?). I'd like to
>remind
>> everyone that, increasing debhelpe
On 6/29/20 8:34 AM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> Ondrej, you once cared for the OpenStack packages. Why are you now
> completely careless?
>
>
> because it's really hard to cooperate with you. I already tried to
> explain it to you but you didn't listen.
You're mixing 2 things: working on OpenSt
17 matches
Mail list logo
