On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 07:05:35PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > Those who are on this list can please comment on adopting ODBL?
> > FWIW, I agree with that choice.
>
> Me too.
+1
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a s
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 02:22:07PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Firstly, thanks for implementing this. I didn't expect anyone to pick
> it up, let alone so quickly!
>
> Thoughts:
>
> debian-volatile has been replaced by the squeeze-updates suite.
>
> I don't think it should warn about this issue in
Firstly, thanks for implementing this. I didn't expect anyone to pick
it up, let alone so quickly!
Thoughts:
debian-volatile has been replaced by the squeeze-updates suite.
I don't think it should warn about this issue in oldstable/stable nor backports.
Adding experimental is a good idea.
It m
Hello,
The PTS now displays "This package has a relationship with
needing a new maintainer" as meant on bug 695732 (another good idea from Paul).
This seems to work fine so far, but I have some questions about tuning.
The script depneedsmaint.pl looks at Sources and Packages files with these
cri
> Package: dogtail
> Version: 0.6.1-3
> Severity: important
> User: debian-qa@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: proposed-orphan
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that
> should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because:
>
> * Out of date with ups
On 16/12/12 at 12:52 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > It is now listed at
> > > http://datahub.io/dataset/debian-package-tracking-system - but
> > > annoyingly it is marked as " License Not Specified".
> >
> > Perhaps the
Processing control commands:
> block -1 by 696093
Bug #696094 [qa.debian.org] PTS: piuparts code only displays sid issues
696094 was not blocked by any bugs.
696094 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 696094: 696093
Warning: Unknown package 'puiparts'
--
696094: http://bugs.debia
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: qa.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts pts
Control: block -1 by 696093
The piuparts code in the PTS only displays sid issues. It should also
display issues with oldstable, stable, testing and oldstable2stable,
stable2testing and testing
Your message dated Sun, 16 Dec 2012 15:38:45 +
with message-id
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 2877
has caused the Debian Bug report #695732,
regarding pts/debcheck: check for relationships with orphaned packages
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pr
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > It is now listed at
> > http://datahub.io/dataset/debian-package-tracking-system - but
> > annoyingly it is marked as " License Not Specified".
>
> Perhaps the question to ask is more who can decide on a license - the
> proje
Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (2012-12-16 10:08:56)
> [ Note: I think -qa would be a better place where to discuss this, as it
> is the list where UDD development is happening. Setting M-F-T
> accordingly. ]
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 12:27:29PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 a
[ Note: I think -qa would be a better place where to discuss this, as it
is the list where UDD development is happening. Setting M-F-T
accordingly. ]
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 12:27:29PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:'
> > What is the license o
12 matches
Mail list logo
