On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 00:44 +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 21:07 +0100, Scott James Remnant a écrit :
> > On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 17:44 +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> >
> > > Scott, can you generate (regularly) a simple list of available Ubuntu
> > > patches ? The PTS w
Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 21:07 +0100, Scott James Remnant a écrit :
> On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 17:44 +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
>
> > Scott, can you generate (regularly) a simple list of available Ubuntu
> > patches ? The PTS would download that file and add the URLs somewhere
> > appropriate if
Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 11:46 -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
> Why are changes made by one particular derived debian distribution so
> important that they should be singled out by the PTS?
Because they're doing a good job and because those changes are done by
DD ... and because the interest of bot
Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 11:15 -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
> Please don't do that. Ubuntu's 1.5 mb patch for base-config is
> thuroughly useless (as I've mentioned before) and if the PTS starts
> nagging me about it, I'll have to stop using the PTS.
Agreed, that's why it's better to simply provid
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 17:44 +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> Scott, can you generate (regularly) a simple list of available Ubuntu
> patches ? The PTS would download that file and add the URLs somewhere
> appropriate if possible.
>
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/PATCHES
It's of the forma
Why are changes made by one particular derived debian distribution so
important that they should be singled out by the PTS? Wouldn't it be
more useful if the PTS highlighted patches that are actually of interest
by those of our users who care enough about working with Debian to file
patches in the
Dear QA-interested,
as you might have noticed, the Debian QA-group[1] is now maintaining
around 265 packages accumulating arround 633 bugs.
That's far too much.
Therefore a Debian-QA-MiniConf will be organized at the Technical
University of Darmstadt[2] from the 9th to the 11th of September.
Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> I'd like to add the integration of patches in the TODO list (much like
Please don't do that. Ubuntu's 1.5 mb patch for base-config is
thuroughly useless (as I've mentioned before) and if the PTS starts
nagging me about it, I'll have to stop using the PTS.
--
see shy jo
Achats Internationaux
en Chine / Taiwan
Objectifs :
Le marché chinois comprend un pays communiste mais en transition vers une économie de marché et deux régions administratives HONG KONG et MACAU dont ladministration publique respecte certains droits démocratiques.
La République Populaire de
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 01:52:07PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
No. They would submit patches, or via the bug tracking system, or via an
rcs. The main difference is the result produced:
- with the bug tracking system, you have a patch which sleeps there for
years, waiting for someone to care
Le Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:41:01AM -0400, Michael Stone:
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:34:05AM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> >If a package is orphaned in Debian, but still have users and people
> >willing to maintain the software, this proposition can help.
>
> I'm still just not getting it.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 09:14:19AM +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote:
This proposal aims to fill the blank in such situations.
What blank? I checked--there are *no* patches in the BTS for dvidvi.
Maybe if there were some patches out there and the argument was about
making the process easier or somesu
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:34:05AM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
If a package is orphaned in Debian, but still have users and people
willing to maintain the software, this proposition can help.
I'm still just not getting it. So you've got an external developer
community that will be active in
Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 10:34 +0200, Benjamin BAYART a écrit :
> > and I can't see how the proposal will add anything that
> > can't already be done if you have active users & developers.
>
> The main difference is between having developpers and having
> Debian-developpers. When you say a packa
> and I can't see how the proposal will add anything that
> can't already be done if you have active users & developers.
The main difference is between having developpers and having
Debian-developpers. When you say a package is orphaned this is a Debian
status, which might not be that right in the
* Michael Stone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) disait :
> IMO, we lose far more points when people install packages which are in
> bad shape but haven't been removed because they don't have enough users
> to notice & file RC bugs.
Yes, I agree, but you are speaking about pure orphaned packages, I mean,
pack
16 matches
Mail list logo
