Package: tracker.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: Vagrant Cascadian
I've recently noticed numerous package page information is out of date
for well over 24+ hours, for example:
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/guix
Shows an upload of 1.4.0~rc2-1 to unstable on 2022-12-11 in the
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: Vagrant Cascadian
I use UDD all the time, huge thanks!
I recently noticed a little checkbox on the Debian Maintainer Dashboard
page which I use regularly, and it seemed to be exactly what I wanted
today:
"Packages recently touched:
On 2020-11-15, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2020-05-28, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> Files generated by texi2html often embed the build user and build date.
...
> I've tested the attached a simpler one-line patch that removes the
> default user value rather than the entire co
On 2020-05-28, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Files generated by texi2html often embed the build user and build date.
It turns out the build date used respects SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, so the date
is not a big issue.
> The attached patch removes the code which embeds the build date and
> buil
On 2019-07-15, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Package: qa.debian.org
> X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org
>
> udd.debian.org still reports reproducible builds results for buster, but
> it should now report issues for bullseye.
>
> If there's somethin
Package: qa.debian.org
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org
udd.debian.org still reports reproducible builds results for buster, but
it should now report issues for bullseye.
If there's something we need to change on the reproducible builds side
to fix this, please let us kno
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
I noticed on https://jenkins.debian.net/userContent/about.html:
five quad-cores (cbxi4a, cbxi4b, and ff4a) with 4gb ram,
But it's clearly having counting troubles, there are only three
systems of that category.
Please merge "the-number-of-th
On 2016-11-01, James McCoy wrote:
> On Nov 1, 2016 11:33, "Lucas Nussbaum" wrote:
>> I tried with the first package listed. It works fine with devscripts
>> 2.16.8 (in testing), but not with 2.16.4~bpo8+1 (in stable-bpo, and
>> installed on ullmann.debian.org).
>>
>> To fix that, an update of tha
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
i see there have been a few nice changes to the qa.debian.org! i routinely use:
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=vagrant
took keep track of things.
i was wondering if it would be possible to move the configuration and help
options after the re
it seems like this is fixed in some views:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/ldm.html
but still appears in others:
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-ltsp-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
live well,
vagrant
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a s
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 11:47:32AM +0100, Michal Čihař wrote:
> The gsynaptics version in unstable is shown wrongly - even older version
> than is in oldstable. The package seems to properly exists in unstable
> Packages files (at least amd64 which I did check).
>
> Both following pages show 0.9.7
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
for quite some time, i've found the qa.debian.org pages extremely useful when
working on packages. thanks so much for maintaining them!
it would be nice to see links to piuparts.debian.org pages on:
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=u...@example
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
for quite some time, i've found the qa.debian.org pages extremely useful when
working on packages. thanks so much for maintaining them!
it would be nice to see links to piuparts.debian.org pages on:
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=u...@example
13 matches
Mail list logo
