Your message dated Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:51:23 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 1916
has caused the Debian Bug report #490879,
regarding qa.debian.org: qa.d.o/orphaned.html should have a link to packages
DDPO
to be marked as done.
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
DDPO has a lot of information, useful when you're in the process to
adopt/do a QA upload of a package, so have a link from[1] to the DDPO
page of those packages would be really helpful.
tomv_w kindly created a page[2] to read orphaned.txt and creat
Hi,
* Michael Ablassmeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-03-24 00:03]:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:17:18PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be better to just list the bugs which are orphaned > 14 days so
> > you don't have to look if the listed package is just orphaned for a few
> > days?
>
>
hi,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:17:18PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to just list the bugs which are orphaned > 14 days so
> you don't have to look if the listed package is just orphaned for a few days?
well, i think the page is not only about having a list of long standing
orp
On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 21:17 +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
>
> http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html says:
>
> This page lists all orphaned packages which do not have their Maintainer:
> header set to the QA Group. If a package has been orphaned for longer than 14
> days, please check the changelog
Hi,
http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html says:
This page lists all orphaned packages which do not have their Maintainer:
header set to the QA Group. If a package has been orphaned for longer than 14
days, please check the changelog whether a new maintainer has uploaded a new
version already -- if s
Hi list,
I'm extending gen-orphaned a qa script[0] (tbm wrote) that can
be seen in action at qa.d.o/orphaned.html. I've some comments:
- I did a rc.py (see attached) that is something like wnpp.py.
- Look at rc.py code, i guess that we can merge rc.py:query()
and wnpp.py:query() i
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 11:48:35PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-22 08:31]:
> > My bad. That was my first go at orphaning packages. I hold reportbug
> > responsible. I'll retitle them.
>
> BTW, Netsnipe has filed duplicate bugs in the meantime, so m
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 02:47:33PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-21 21:31]:
> > Hmm. I orphaned some xfce4 related packages the other day, and they haven't
> > turned up yet...
>
> The Subject: line of those bugs is not well-formed (tag: package
> i
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-22 08:31]:
> My bad. That was my first go at orphaning packages. I hold reportbug
> responsible. I'll retitle them.
BTW, Netsnipe has filed duplicate bugs in the meantime, so maybe you
can also merge them. ;)
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Daniel Silverstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-21 13:01]:
> > Hmm. I orphaned some xfce4 related packages the other day, and they haven't
> > turned up yet...
>
> Out of interest, which ones?
N Apr 19 Andrew Pollock[0.5K] Bug#244569: O:
xfce4-systemload-plugin
N Apr 19 And
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-21 21:31]:
> Hmm. I orphaned some xfce4 related packages the other day, and they haven't
> turned up yet...
The Subject: line of those bugs is not well-formed (tag: package
instead of tag: package -- description). But we don't really care
about the de
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 12:31, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> Hmm. I orphaned some xfce4 related packages the other day, and they haven't
> turned up yet...
Out of interest, which ones?
D.
--
Daniel Silverstone http://www.digital-scurf.org/
Hostmaster, Webmaster, and Chief Code Wib
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 12:04:45AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-20 08:46]:
> > This page doesn't seem to have been updated since Sunday, depending
> > on which timestamp you believe at the bottom of the file.
>
> Everything's fine. The data for or
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-04-20 08:46]:
> This page doesn't seem to have been updated since Sunday, depending
> on which timestamp you believe at the bottom of the file.
Everything's fine. The data for orphaned.html is only updated once a
day (after dinstall)... dinstall just ran
Hi,
This page doesn't seem to have been updated since Sunday, depending on which
timestamp you believe at the bottom of the file.
regards
Andrew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 09:44:46PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:28:31AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> >
> > Did you look in CVS?
> >
>
> Hmm, have now. Looks like it's been deleted. I wonder it it's worthwhile
> porting your TCL backend to a backend that ships with Ope
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:28:31AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> Did you look in CVS?
>
Hmm, have now. Looks like it's been deleted. I wonder it it's worthwhile
porting your TCL backend to a backend that ships with OpenLDAP as standard,
that way we don't need to rely on a custom TCLified LDAP se
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:18:25PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 04:20:38PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:03:16AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it as simple as taking the existing openldap2 source package from
> > > unstable, buildi
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 04:20:38PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:03:16AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> >
> > Is it as simple as taking the existing openldap2 source package from
> > unstable, building it against woody, with TCL enabled? I'd like to help.
>
> That's the t
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 04:20:38PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:03:16AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> >
> > Is it as simple as taking the existing openldap2 source package from
> > unstable, building it against woody, with TCL enabled? I'd like to help.
>
> That's the t
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 08:03:16AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 08:13:26AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> > Just had a baby Friday, so I'll need some extra time. If anyone else
> > feels like getting a set of openldap2 packages built with the tcl
> > backend for master, I
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 08:13:26AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Just had a baby Friday, so I'll need some extra time. If anyone else
> feels like getting a set of openldap2 packages built with the tcl
> backend for master, I would appreciate the help.
Is it as simple as taking the existing openlda
Am Di Jan 06, 2004 at 08:1326 -0500 gab Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> von
sich:
> [...]
> Just had a baby Friday, so I'll need some extra time. If anyone else
> feels like getting a set of openldap2 packages built with the tcl
> backend for master, I would appreciate the help.
Congratulations. H
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 12:32:08PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-06 14:31]:
> > I noticed that this page was updated on December 31, but then hasn't
> > subsequently been updated again. When's it likely to return to normal daily
> > updates?
>
> It
* Martin Michlmayr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040106 13:40]:
> It requires the LDAP interface to the BTS, but this is not an
> official service but one run by Ben Collins. I'm not sure when it
> will be back. Ben?
As the BTS-LDAP-Gateway is not only usefull for this page, it seems to
me useful to make
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-06 14:31]:
> I noticed that this page was updated on December 31, but then hasn't
> subsequently been updated again. When's it likely to return to normal daily
> updates?
It requires the LDAP interface to the BTS, but this is not an
official service bu
Hi,
I noticed that this page was updated on December 31, but then hasn't
subsequently been updated again. When's it likely to return to normal daily
updates?
regards
Andrew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
28 matches
Mail list logo
