On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 10:14:52PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The next cycle for bookworm should end somewhere around 8th March
> Please indicate your availability for:
>
> 1 March
> 8 March
> 15 March
>
> Thanks,
>
All of the above are fine by me.
Andrew Cater
(amaca...@deb
On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 05:31:55PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The next cycle for bookworm should end somewhere around 2nd November.
> Please ignore previous mails (!) and indicate your availability for:
>
> 26 October
> 2 November
> 9 November
>
Should be able to do 2 and 9 Nove
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:35:35PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A finally-final point release is required for bullseye, and we're a bit
> constrained on dates. The security team (CC) wish to cease security support
> from Wednesday 14th August and hand over to LTS as soon as a wash-up
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 01:07:17PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The final bullseye point release 11.10 (and therefore also 12.6 for
> versioning) should be soon after 10th June, when security team support
> will end.
>
> Please indicate availability for:
>
> Saturday 15th June
>
On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 01:07:27PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we had to postpone 12.6, let's look at alternative dates.
>
Can do all, I think,
Andy
(amaca...@debian.org)
>
> Adam
>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:04:17PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 12.6 should be around 10th April, so please indicate availability for:
>
> 7 April
> 13 April
> 20 April
>
> Thanks,
>
Should be available for all these
Andy
> --
> Jonathan Wiltshire
On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 09:25:06PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's time to set a date for 12.5 (taking account of the emergency .4) and
> 11.9. I expect this to be the penultimate update for bullseye before LTS.
>
> Please indicate availability for:
>
> Saturday 3rd February (
On Sat, Sep 09, 2023 at 11:42:45AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2023 at 11:13:56AM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > If we're now reaching the final limit and if it was foreseeable that we
> > would reach that limit, then yes it would have made sense to drop armel
> > *before*
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 08:21:54AM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The proper cadence for 11.8 and 12.2 is the weekend of 30th September 2023.
> Please indicate your availability for:
>
> 23 Sep
> 30 Sep (preferred)
> 7 Oct
>
> Thanks,
>
Subject to willingness of others to accommoda
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 08:31:23PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're (again) running behind in getting the next point release for
> bullseye sorted, and I know we're about to run into the Deb{Camp,Conf}
> period. I think the possible dates that make sense are:
>
> - July 2nd (means fr
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 02:38:13PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's that time again, when we should get 10.8 out.
>
> Please could you confirm your availability, and any preferences, for
> the following:
>
> - January 30th (would mean we would have to freeze next weekend, so a
> bit
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 07:55:11PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> Dear release team
>
> There seems to be only one maintainer.
>
Still true as far as I can see - others have stepped up to test i386
executables but no more developers.
> Is i386 going to be supportable for
Dear release team
Having participated in the current discussion about 32 bit releases and
lifetimes in Linux Weekly News (lwn.net) - what's the status of i386 for the
lifetime of Bullseye?
There seems to be only one maintainer.
Is i386 going to be supportable for the next 3 1/2 years and builda
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 08:45:47AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Holger Levsen (2017-06-13):
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:19:17AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > > Known bugs in this release
> > > ==
> > [...]
> > > See the errata[2] for details and a full list of kn
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:06:04AM +0100, Jürgen Leibner wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008 00:07 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > while discussing the state of our infrastructure among some members
> > of DSA and the security team we once more realized how badly hppa was
> > doing. First c
A couple of mirror changes which will hit the UK over the next couple of
months.
The joint university mirror at mirror.ac.uk will shut down in July when
its funding is cut.
There is currently an alternative at mirrorservice.org (University of
Kent, Canterbury/University of Lancaster).
Telewes
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 06:38:05PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit :
> > So the release criteria require buildd redundancy. And yet, half the
> > release candidate archs still don't have it. It gets marked in yellow
> > on http://release.debian.org/etch_arch_qualify.htm
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 07:30:39PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> >> Sure, but python2.5 is not really usable: almost all the python modules a=
> > re
> >> compiled only for python2.4. For postgresql you are right and I'm wrong,
> >> but I suppose that there are othe
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 07:05:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Currently lilypond 2.8.7 is in unstable. It is blocked waiting for its
> own timelimit and for guile-1.8 to finish building on other archs and
> migrate itself.
>
If you want to get a 2.8.* release in, wait. If Etch is release
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:42:48AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> Will ia32-libs on ia64 still be supported for the etch release?
>
> Matthias
>
I hope so or something that works just like it :) Commercial anti-virus
product Sophos SWEEP is mandatory on Unix/Linux/Windows where I work.
On
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:24:38AM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 05:05:09PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Then we would have
> >
> > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable
> > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD masteri
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:46:12AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
> >before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
> >impossibile, while a two years release seems reasonable to me.
> So
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:01:58AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:49:13AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >...
> > I see the same three options. Joey has said he is working on a final woody
> > point release for the last weekend in May; you'll probably need to
> > coordinate
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:45:46PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 16.05.2005, at 11:55, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >We mentioned in the freeze announcement[1] that we needed
> >volunteers to
> >help with processing upgrade reports -- taking them
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 10:02:26AM +0800, Andrew Shugg wrote:
> Goswin von Brederlow said:
> > Is anyone still using real i386 cpus?
>
I have one in fully working condition - but only with 6M of memory :(
[Will probably run 0.93rc1 fine, though :) ]
Quite a lot of smaller PC104 class embedded CPU
26 matches
Mail list logo
