Re: Package shotwell

2017-02-14 Thread Richard B. Kreckel
On 02/13/2017 09:03 PM, Richard B. Kreckel wrote: > Good to hear again from you regarding this package, Jörg! > > On 02/13/2017 05:32 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> On 13/02/17 13:15, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Is there a way to get the old version shotwell / 0.24.0-1 ba

Re: Package shotwell

2017-02-13 Thread Richard B. Kreckel
Hi, Good to hear again from you regarding this package, Jörg! On 02/13/2017 05:32 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 13/02/17 13:15, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: >> Hello, >> >> >> Is there a way to get the old version shotwell / 0.24.0-1 back in >> testing. >> >> The current version 0.25.1-1 is

Re: Package shotwell

2017-02-13 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 13.02.2017 um 17:32 schrieb Emilio Pozuelo Monfort: > On 13/02/17 13:15, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: >> Hello, >> >> >> Is there a way to get the old version shotwell / 0.24.0-1 back in >> testing. >> >> The current version 0.25.1-1 is to buggy. > > Not surprising, given 0.25.x are from the develo

Re: Package shotwell

2017-02-13 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 13/02/17 13:15, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: > Hello, > > > Is there a way to get the old version shotwell / 0.24.0-1 back in > testing. > > The current version 0.25.1-1 is to buggy. Not surprising, given 0.25.x are from the development branch. There is #854912 asking to unblock 0.25.4. Going b

Package shotwell

2017-02-13 Thread Jörg Frings-Fürst
Hello, Is there a way to get the old version shotwell / 0.24.0-1 back in testing. The current version 0.25.1-1 is to buggy. CU Jörg -- New: GPG Fingerprint: 63E0 075F C8D4 3ABB 35AB  30EE 09F8 9F3C 8CA1 D25D GPG key (long) : 09F89F3C8CA1D25D GPG Key: 8CA1D25D CAcert Key S/N : 0E:D4:56

Bug#807855: marked as done (jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1)

2015-12-31 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Fri, 01 Jan 2016 05:52:19 +0100 with message-id <1451623939.6861.1.ca...@jff-webhosting.net> and subject line Debian bug: #807855 has caused the Debian Bug report #807855, regarding jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim th

Bug#807855: jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1

2015-12-13 Thread Jörg Frings-Fürst
Hello Adam, Am Sonntag, den 13.12.2015, 20:12 + schrieb Adam D. Barratt: > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 20:59 +0100, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: > > Correct CVE TEMP-0807110-881366 > > +  * CVE TEMP-0807110-881366 (Closes: #807110): > > Don't do that. For one thing, "

Processed: Re: Bug#807855: jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1

2015-12-13 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #807855 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 807855: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=807855 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#807855: jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1

2015-12-13 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 20:59 +0100, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: > Correct CVE TEMP-0807110-881366 + * CVE TEMP-0807110-881366 (Closes: #807110): Don't do that. For one thing, "CVE TEMP-*" makes no sense - it's *not* a CVE identifier. TEMP-* identifiers are not meaningfu

Bug#807855: jessie-pu: package shotwell/0.20.1-1

2015-12-13 Thread Jörg Frings-Fürst
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: jessie User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Correct CVE TEMP-0807110-881366 The debdiff between shotwell 0.20.1-1 and shotwell 0.20.1-1+deb8u1 is attached. - -- System Informa