Hi Adam,
>> * Fix a traceback around the handling of RequestSite/get_current_site()
>> due
>> to a circular import by backporting commit 78163d1a from upstream.
>> Thanks
>> to Raphaël Hertzog for the report. (Closes: #1003478)
>
> That change doesn't look like it made it to unst
Hi Adam--
No problem, i've made way worse copy/paste mistakes myself 😛
On Thu 2022-02-03 06:41:21 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 - pending
For clarity, I'm assuming this means that the GnuPG upload for bullseye
(#1004452) is *not* yet approved, and i will wait for additional
fe
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #1003176 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.34
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
1003176: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1003176
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 2022-01-23 12:45:16, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: block -1 by 1002681
> Control: forwarded -1
> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl-5.34.html
>
> On 2022-01-05 17:00:54 +, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > User: release.de
Processing changes file: pypy3_7.3.5+dfsg-2+deb11u1_armhf-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User:release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hi,
We would like to add ruby3.0 as the default and remove ruby2.7 support.
Ben file:
title = "ruby2.7-rm";
is_affected = (.depends ~ /ruby2.7/ | .depends ~ /ruby3.0/) & !.source ~
/^
Hi Holger,
> and filed against src:debian-security-support, as openjdk-17 seems to be
> supported and src:debian-security-support's purpose is to documented what's
no, 11 is supported, 17 is just for users to run third-party
stuff on (IIUC).
bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent sol
Your message dated Thu, 3 Feb 2022 15:56:56 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#1002681: transition: ocaml
has caused the Debian Bug report #1002681,
regarding transition: ocaml
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the cas
hi,
almost exactly a year ago...
On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 11:59:23AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> So I'm going with option 1, preparing for an openjdk-17 in bullseye, and
> preparing release notes and notes for security support. This is more
> conservative than option 2, but allows to do better
Processing changes file: pypy3_7.3.5+dfsg-2+deb11u1_armel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: pypy3_7.3.5+dfsg-2+deb11u1_mips64el-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: pypy3_7.3.5+dfsg-2+deb11u1_mipsel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Hi
On 2022-02-02 22:24:40 -0500, M. Zhou wrote:
> Hi release team,
>
> Some time ago the rakudo tracker is set up
> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/rakudo.html
>
> At that time packages like raku-tap-harness depends on
> raku-api-2021.09 , which is provided by rakudo 2021.09
>
> No
Hi again,
On 03-02-2022 09:16, Paul Gevers wrote:
As with all required rebuilds, you can request them (preferably using
$(reportbug release.debian.org). I'll schedule the rebuilds shortly for
this round.
I didn't check well. These are arch:all binaries which can't be properly
binNMU-ed with
Hi,
On 03-02-2022 04:24, M. Zhou wrote:
Some time ago the rakudo tracker is set up
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/rakudo.html
At that time packages like raku-tap-harness depends on
raku-api-2021.09 , which is provided by rakudo 2021.09
Now that rakudo 2021.12 has landed onto uns
15 matches
Mail list logo
