Your message dated Tue, 17 Dec 2019 11:31:08 + (UTC)
with message-id <20191217113108.70C0916284@tiaron.localdomain>
and subject line Consider it dead. [Re: Kill DEHS]
has caused the Debian Bug report #717834,
regarding Fwd: Kill DEHS
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim th
Your message dated Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:40:55 +0200
with message-id <20180619104055.gb7...@home.ouaza.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#626254: Suggestion to Close This Bug Report
has caused the Debian Bug report #626254,
regarding DEHS and QA pages lacking upstream data -> div by zero
to be
Your message dated Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:29:57 +
with message-id
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 3473
has caused the Debian Bug report #814368,
regarding PTS: removal of udd-dehs script means we get mail from the PTS about
it daily
to be marked as done.
This means that
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 23:19 +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> I think you can simply download the UDD CGI directly, the format
> should be compatible enough.
I'm short on time so I'll leave it to you to fix.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a di
Re: Paul Wise 2016-02-10 <1455141522.2616.15.ca...@debian.org>
> Christoph, please fix the PTS to use the new service that replaces the
> udd-dehs script, we are currently getting mails about it daily since
> you removed the script from the UDD site.
>
> From: Cron Da
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: qa.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pts
Owner: Christoph Berg
X-Debbugs-CC: Christoph Berg
Christoph, please fix the PTS to use the new service that replaces the
udd-dehs script, we are currently getting mails about it daily since
you
Your message dated Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:55:21 +0100
with message-id <20160128125521.ga20...@msg.df7cb.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#767024: tracker.debian.org: Reports wrong new upstream
for a native package
has caused the Debian Bug report #767024,
regarding udd-dehs: Report wrong new up
On 2015-08-27 17:38:33, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Given that UDD does more, it could also implement a stripped down
> version. But I'm not sure what is the functionality you are looking for.
> Monitor a specific package using RSS? Stats?
I want to get an email when either:
1. there's a new upstrea
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> Given that UDD does more, it could also implement a stripped down
> version. But I'm not sure what is the functionality you are looking for.
> Monitor a specific package using RSS? Stats?
>
As for me, the most useful Debian External Hea
On 27/08/15 at 09:45 -0400, anarcat wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:01:46PM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> > Package: qa.debian.org
> >
> > DEHS service at http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/ looks alive, but in
> > fact it is dead and its database is offline for alm
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 4:45 PM, anarcat wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:01:46PM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> > Package: qa.debian.org
> >
> > DEHS service at http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/ looks alive, but in
> > fact it is dead and its database is o
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:01:46PM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> Package: qa.debian.org
>
> DEHS service at http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/ looks alive, but in
> fact it is dead and its database is offline for almost two years,
> which is shown by multiple reports in ML over t
On 27/05/15 at 22:22 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:41:34PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd consider the implementation of status as ENUM more performant than
> > > a plain text. Am I missing something?
> >
> > status is returned by uscan. I did not want to
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:41:34PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > I'd consider the implementation of status as ENUM more performant than
> > a plain text. Am I missing something?
>
> status is returned by uscan. I did not want to write in stone the list
> of possible statuses returned by u
g report would
> > > be the appropriate course of actions.
> >
> > The dehs table was trying to mirror the data provided by DEHS.
> > Unfortunately, DEHS died a long time ago, so the 'upstream' gatherer
> > (and table) were created.
> >
> > I rec
Hi Lucas,
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 08:51:30AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > If somebody could explain the role of these competing tables I could
> > decide whether adapting the Blends code or filing a bug report would
> > be the appropriate course of actions.
>
> The
Hi,
On 26/05/15 at 20:28 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> could anybody please explain the role of the different tables upstream
> and dehs which look quite similar but show different results:
>
> udd=> SELECT unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status f
Hi,
could anybody please explain the role of the different tables upstream
and dehs which look quite similar but show different results:
udd=> SELECT unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status from dehs where source =
'trimmomatic' ;
unstable_parsed_version | un
On 18/03/15 at 17:59 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> retitle 748223 UDD: uscan doesn't understand pgpsigurlmangle
> thanks
>
> On 20/05/14 at 07:47 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > UDD's DEHS reimplementation seems to fail for two distinct usecases: FTP
> > con
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 748223 UDD: uscan doesn't understand pgpsigurlmangle
Bug #748223 [qa.debian.org] UDD: DMD - "uscan returned an error" while fixed in
PTS
Changed Bug title to 'UDD: uscan doesn't understand pgpsigurlmangle' from 'UDD:
DMD - "uscan returne
retitle 748223 UDD: uscan doesn't understand pgpsigurlmangle
thanks
On 20/05/14 at 07:47 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> UDD's DEHS reimplementation seems to fail for two distinct usecases: FTP
> connections that need active mode are failing (for instance a lot of the KDE
> t
Hi,
I observed this now since one week and I can confirm, even if crontab
contains
0 4,16 * * * $UAR pts dehs debian-popcon ...
the dehs importer needs to be run via
update-and-run.sh dehs
otherwise the UDD table dehs remains untouched.
Do we have any means to observe this more closely
This sounds related to #748223
Lucas
- Forwarded message from Nicolas Dandrimont -
From: Nicolas Dandrimont
To: debian-qa@lists.debian.org
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 18:49:27 +0200
Subject: UDD's DEHS reimplementation, FTP upstreams and GPG signature checking
Message-ID: <201405
Hi folks,
UDD's DEHS reimplementation seems to fail for two distinct usecases: FTP
connections that need active mode are failing (for instance a lot of the KDE
team watch files are failing), and the uscan version installed on ullmann
doesn't understand the gpg signature checking and fai
Package: qa.debian.org
During the upgrade of quantz to wheezy we noticed that cgi-bin/udd-dehs was the
last script needing more memory. As I wrote on IRC :
a cgi script like that should produce so much info, looks like batch
processing instead of online cgi
maybe we should replace cgi-bin
Package: qa.debian.org
DEHS service at http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/ looks alive, but in
fact it is dead and its database is offline for almost two years,
which is shown by multiple reports in ML over that time
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/dehs-devel/
It's time to kill it so th
gt;
> > > > I checked whether the columns starzing with experimental_* might contain
> > > > any content:
> > > >
> > > > udd=# SELECT distinct experimental_version, experimental_upstream,
> > > > experimental_parsed_versi
Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I checked whether the columns starzing with experimental_* might contain
> > > > any content:
> > > >
> > > > udd=# SELECT distinct experimental_version, experimental_upstream,
> > >
al_* might contain
> > > any content:
> > >
> > > udd=# SELECT distinct experimental_version, experimental_upstream,
> > > experimental_parsed_version, experimental_status,
> > > experimental_last_uptodate from dehs ;
> > > experimental_
al_* might contain
> > > any content:
> > >
> > > udd=# SELECT distinct experimental_version, experimental_upstream,
> > > experimental_parsed_version, experimental_status,
> > > experimental_last_uptodate from dehs ;
> > > experimental_
rimental_version, experimental_upstream,
> > experimental_parsed_version, experimental_status,
> > experimental_last_uptodate from dehs ;
> > experimental_version | experimental_upstream | experimental_parsed_versio
, experimental_status, experimental_last_uptodate
> from dehs ;
> experimental_version | experimental_upstream | experimental_parsed_version |
> experimental_statu
Hi,
I checked whether the columns starzing with experimental_* might contain
any content:
udd=# SELECT distinct experimental_version, experimental_upstream,
experimental_parsed_version, experimental_status, experimental_last_uptodate
from dehs ;
experimental_version | experimental_upstream
Your message dated Thu, 23 May 2013 22:31:01 +0800
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#459012: qa.debian.org: DEHS should check for validity
of Homepage: and Vcs-Browser:
has caused the Debian Bug report #459012,
regarding qa.debian.org: DEHS should check for validity of Homepage: and
Vcs
On 2012-10-30 16:52, Bart Martens wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:11:16AM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
On 2012-10-13 15:36, Bart Martens wrote:
>On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>>DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
>
Your message dated Wed, 31 Oct 2012 05:58:35 +
with message-id
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 2852
has caused the Debian Bug report #690384,
regarding DEHS: ignore epoch when considering new upstream releases
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:17:47 +
with message-id <20121030211747.gc25...@master.debian.org>
and subject line qa.debian.org: DEHS uses watch file from sid (fixed for a
branch) for package in experimental (should accept latest)
has caused the Debian Bug report #647894,
reg
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 20:13:16 +
with message-id
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 2851
has caused the Debian Bug report #690384,
regarding DEHS: ignore epoch when considering new upstream releases
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 690384
Bug #690384 {Done: Bart Martens } [qa.debian.org] DEHS:
ignore epoch when considering new upstream releases
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #690384 to the same values
previously set
> stop
St
reopen 690384
stop
I think that this is an example :
http://packages.qa.debian.org/z/zodb.html
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?packages=zodb
http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/watch?pkg=zodb_1%3A3.9.7-2
| package: zodb
| debian-uversion: 1:3.9.7
| debian-mangled-uversion: 1:3.9.7
| upstre
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:52:15 +
with message-id <20121030165215.ga25...@master.debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#690384: DEHS: ignore epoch when considering new
upstream releases
has caused the Debian Bug report #690384,
regarding DEHS: ignore epoch when consideri
Hi,
On 2012-10-13 15:36, Bart Martens wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
Do you have an example of where this goes wrong ?
Sorry I did not
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 07:10:03 +
with message-id <20121030071003.ge25...@master.debian.org>
and subject line [DEHS] watch file not picked up by DEHS, pkg displayed as
having no watch file
has caused the Debian Bug report #572243,
regarding [DEHS] watch file not picked up b
Hi Jonathan,
News on this ?
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=690384
Regards,
Bart Martens
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2012102809565
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 690384 moreinfo
Bug #690384 [qa.debian.org] DEHS: ignore epoch when considering new upstream
releases
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
690384: http://bugs.debian.o
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
> watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
Do you have an example of where this goes wrong ?
Regards,
Bart Martens
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
DEHS does not appear to allow for an epoch when considering
watch files for the watch columns on the DDPO.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable&#
wheezy| debian
> emboss | 6.4.0-2 | sid | debian
> (5 Zeilen)
>
> udd=# SELECT source, unstable_version, unstable_upstream,
> unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status from dehs where source = 'emboss' ;
> source | unstable_
Andreas Tille wrote:
[...]
> Any reason why DEHS considers emboss outdated?
DHES was killed over a year ago. Whatever is currently used to run uscan
isn't DEHS.
Regards,
--
Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
ECT source, unstable_version, unstable_upstream,
unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status from dehs where source = 'emboss' ;
source | unstable_version | unstable_upstream | unstable_parsed_versio
Your message dated Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:45:03 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Not a bug
has caused the Debian Bug report #659952,
regarding [DEHS]: Db error and no new version found
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
DEHS seems to be broken as a lot of new upstream versions are not seen.
I get 'Db error' (example:
http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=ctdb&Display=Submit+Query)
and no version for all php-horde-* packages
(http:/
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
the watch file report as of today in
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?packages=nvidia-graphics-drivers
is incorrect:
Watch
UnstableExp
280.13.really.275.36280.13.really.275.36
Download link to 275.36 tarbal
Hi!
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:11:37 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> We don't distinguish unstable and experimental anymore in the DEHS
> setup; the "up to date" messages is what uscan outputs when passed a
> version number (which we take from unstable). At the moment I
Your message dated Thu, 01 Sep 2011 09:19:06 +
with message-id
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 2574
has caused the Debian Bug report #469153,
regarding pkg.qa.d.o: summary keyword does contain DEHS mails in addition to
testing transition
to be marked as done.
This means
Hi,
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011, Christoph Berg wrote:
> * fix the PTS to use that
I just did that and I reused the same YAML file you exported for UDD.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHert
Hi Raphael,
On Mon, 04 Jul 2011, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > I've set up a WIP version of a new DEHS instance that uses the watch
> > files from the lintian lab to submit uscan results to mole. The data
> > is then extracted as a .db file and presented in DDPO.
>
> I
Christoph Berg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've set up a WIP version of a new DEHS instance that uses the watch
> files from the lintian lab to submit uscan results to mole. The data
> is then extracted as a .db file and presented in DDPO.
I know I disappeared, but this is... *sigh*
Re: Lucas Nussbaum 2011-06-15 <20110615084236.ga13...@xanadu.blop.info>
> > > UDD was importing DEHS data from
> > > http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/udd_dump.txt
> yes, YAML would be perfect.
Hi,
sorry it took a while. There now yaml data at
http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bi
On 15/06/11 at 10:32 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Lucas Nussbaum 2011-06-14 <20110614172545.ga8...@xanadu.blop.info>
> > UDD was importing DEHS data from
> > http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/udd_dump.txt
>
> abi-compliance-checker|1.21.12||1.6-1||1.6-1||f||f||1970
Re: Lucas Nussbaum 2011-06-14 <20110614172545.ga8...@xanadu.blop.info>
> UDD was importing DEHS data from
> http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/udd_dump.txt
abi-compliance-checker|1.21.12||1.6-1||1.6-1||f||f||1970-01-01 00:00:00|
abicheck|1.2||1.2-5||1.2-5||t||f||2011-05-04 06:15:58|
abind|
On 14/06/11 at 14:28 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: To debian-qa@lists.debian.org 2011-06-08
> <20110608094252.gc3...@msgid.df7cb.de>
> > I've set up a WIP version of a new DEHS instance that uses the watch
> > files from the lintian lab to submit uscan results
Re: To debian-qa@lists.debian.org 2011-06-08
<20110608094252.gc3...@msgid.df7cb.de>
> I've set up a WIP version of a new DEHS instance that uses the watch
> files from the lintian lab to submit uscan results to mole. The data
> is then extracted as a .db file and presente
Hi,
I've set up a WIP version of a new DEHS instance that uses the watch
files from the lintian lab to submit uscan results to mole. The data
is then extracted as a .db file and presented in DDPO.
Todo:
* fix the PTS to use that
* re-add some watch wizard for packages without a watch
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
FYI, http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/no_watch.html displays :
Total source packages without watch file: 0 Total source packages: 0 Share:
Warning: Division by zero in
/srv/alioth.debian.org/chroot/home/groups/dehs/dehs_prj/trunk/www/no_watch.php
on line 64
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Experimental:
>> Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:05
> Unstable:
>> Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:24
>
> Something must have went wrong between the two checks.
And it failed again. There seems to be something limiting the number of
connections.
I've modified t
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:13PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> > Any reasonable explanation for this?
>>
>> Experimental:
>> > Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:05
>> Unstable:
>> > Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:24
>>
>> Something must have went wrong between
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:13PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > Any reasonable explanation for this?
>
> Experimental:
> > Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:05
> Unstable:
> > Last time checked: 2011-01-04 18:07:24
>
> Something must have went wrong between the two checks.
How are these
Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering, why DEHS claims ncbi-tools6 as not 'uptodate' but rather
> 'error'. The DEHS page[1] says for experimental
>
[...]
> I'm actually running into an error. What I really do not understand is,
> that t
Hi,
I was wondering, why DEHS claims ncbi-tools6 as not 'uptodate' but rather
'error'.
The DEHS page[1] says for experimental
# Watch: view (comments below)
Too bad uscan doesn't actually honor downloadurlmangle for FTP urls. :-/
[would use downloadurlmangle=&qu
Taking a random sample tkgate:
http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=tkgate
http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/wwiz_detail.php?id=33498256&type=watch
http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/wwiz_detail.php?id=33496155&type=watch
Yes it looks like DEHS knows unstable/experimental can and
Hi,
Hi,
I have not dived into the DEHS importer for UDD but I wonder what might
be the meaning of different unstable_upstream and experimental_upstream
fields. To the best of my knowledge we have only one way to specify an
upstream version which is done in the watch file and I lived under the
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm not sure of the problem here. It can either be:
> - In the dehs table, UDD shows the unstable_version as provided by DEHS,
> which, due to synchronization delays, might not be the latest one in
> unstable. => I don't think that this sh
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 12:30:55PM -0400, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm not sure of the problem here. It can either be:
> - In the dehs table, UDD shows the unstable_version as provided by DEHS,
> which, due to synchronization delays, might not be the latest one in
> unstabl
On 05/08/10 at 14:01 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder what principle might be used to obtain the unstable_version in dehs
> table.
> Example:
>
> udd=# SELECT source, unstable_version, unstable_upstream,
> unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status FROM deh
Hi,
I wonder what principle might be used to obtain the unstable_version in dehs
table.
Example:
udd=# SELECT source, unstable_version, unstable_upstream,
unstable_parsed_version, unstable_status FROM dehs d WHERE source =
'r-cran-maptools' ;
source | unstab
Your message dated Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:02:42 -0400
with message-id <201007281402.42935.geiss...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#556286: qa.debian.org: Discrepancies between p.qa.d.o
and DEHS
has caused the Debian Bug report #556286,
regarding qa.debian.org: Discrepancies between p.qa.d
.
A package of mine (skanlite) is displayed by DEHS as not having a debian/watch
file (see [0]). But as can be verified easily by checking the contents of the
.debian.tar.bz2 file [1], the package _does_ have a watch file. Using said watch
file locally with uscan works and reports back correctly wh
Your message dated Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:35:26 -0600
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#565288: DEHS: fbcat is ignored despite watch file
present in source package
has caused the Debian Bug report #565288,
regarding DEHS: fbcat is ignored despite watch file present in source package
to be
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
DEHS for fbcat[1] results in page with no results despite watch file
present in fbcat's source package.
The output is (almost) the same as for any non-existent package[2].
[1] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=fbcat
[2]
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:47:18 -0600
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#560697: qa.debian.org: old watch file used for DEHS
for pam-pgsql
has caused the Debian Bug report #560697,
regarding qa.debian.org: old watch file used for DEHS for pam-pgsql
to be marked as done.
This
on in all the architectures.
>
> It is at least on all supported architectures in unstable. Even the version in
> testing has a newer watch file.
No, check packages.d.o, hurd still has the old version DEHS is finding.
>
>> I will eventually make it use the latest version no matter in w
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:28:46PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Jan Dittberner wrote:
>
> > Package: qa.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > my DDPO shows an outdated upstream version in the unstable Watch column.
> > Obviously DEHS does not use the cu
Jan Dittberner wrote:
> Package: qa.debian.org
> Severity: normal
>
> my DDPO shows an outdated upstream version in the unstable Watch column.
> Obviously DEHS does not use the current watch file from the package in
> unstable but an old version (maybe the one from the version
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
my DDPO shows an outdated upstream version in the unstable Watch column.
Obviously DEHS does not use the current watch file from the package in
unstable but an old version (maybe the one from the version in Lenny).
Regards
Jan
--
Jan Dittberner - Debian
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hello,
There is a discrepancy in the newer upstream release reported by DEHS
and the one printed in p.qa.d.o:
http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=moin
-> Upstream version: 1.9.0~rc1
http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/moin.html
->
Your message dated Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:14:55 +0200
with message-id <200907241914.56015.geiss...@debian.org>
and subject line Bug fixed
has caused the Debian Bug report #537123,
regarding ddpo: watch column is not updating from DEHS
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the p
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
The watch column on my DDPO page isn't updating from DEHS (DEHS does show the
correct information, as far as I can see). It seems to be the case for other
developers to.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 01:06:47PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Alexander Wirt [Sat, 07 Mar 2009 12:13:35 +0100]:
>
> > Good news: since DSA requested the package it is already accepted in lenny
> > bpo regardless of the NEW queue.
>
> Ah, great, thanks. Expect a new upload soon, because TTBO
* Alexander Wirt [Sat, 07 Mar 2009 12:13:35 +0100]:
> Good news: since DSA requested the package it is already accepted in lenny
> bpo regardless of the NEW queue.
Ah, great, thanks. Expect a new upload soon, because TTBOMK the uploaded
package has a bug that makes the sql not useable as-is (it
Adeodato Simó schrieb am Saturday, den 07. March 2009:
Hi,
> * Roger Leigh [Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:38:11 +]:
>
> > So, in summary:
> > - DUMP YOUR DATABASE FIRST in case something screws up!!
> > - build and install debversion.so
> > - install the debversion type in your database using debvers
* Roger Leigh [Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:38:11 +]:
> So, in summary:
> - DUMP YOUR DATABASE FIRST in case something screws up!!
> - build and install debversion.so
> - install the debversion type in your database using debversion.sql
> - verify it's working as shown above
> - alter your version colu
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:13:35PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 02/03/09 at 13:15 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> >> The plan is to switch to Roger Leigh's work in UDD as well, but someone
> >> needs to do the work, and unfortunately, i'm very bu
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Looks good. Any hint how to reasonably obtain
description of binaries
long_description of binaries
homepage
license(perhaps)
Regarding (short) description I have this file generated daily using
UDD available for dow
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 12:04:55PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.822
>
> Looks good. Any hint how to reasonably obtain
>
>description of binaries
>long_description of binaries
>homepage
>license(perhaps)
Regarding (short) des
On 02/03/09 at 13:15 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
>> The plan is to switch to Roger Leigh's work in UDD as well, but someone
>> needs to do the work, and unfortunately, i'm very busy currently. See
>> http://git.debian.org/?p=users/rleigh/sbuild.git;a=tr
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
The plan is to switch to Roger Leigh's work in UDD as well, but someone
needs to do the work, and unfortunately, i'm very busy currently. See
http://git.debian.org/?p=users/rleigh/sbuild.git;a=tree;f=db;hb=81fd39259953853632a7d0e2198cfc745d270fe3
for his
Hi, and sorry for the delay.
On 25/02/09 at 17:03 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
>> Regarding the version number I found
>>
>> http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/collab-qa/udd/sql/debvercmp.sql?view=markup
>>
>> which contains a function which implements `dp
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
Regarding the version number I found
http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/collab-qa/udd/sql/debvercmp.sql?view=markup
which contains a function which implements `dpkg --compare-versions` in SQL
which would be really handy for my task. Unfortunately this fu
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists//main/i18n/
and injects the following structure in UDD:
package, language, version, distribution, release, component (='main'),
description, long_description
Sounds good. Maybe reorder them a bit:
packag
1 - 100 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
