Hi,
Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2023-10-22 16:03:46)
> Unless there is a plan to pu this change to stable's debootstrap, we are a
> full release cycle away from this change having an effect. The time to change
> this in deboostrap is now.
debootstrap 1.0.133 now creates chroots with only essentia
On 2023-10-11 13:15:36 +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2023-10-10 16:27:02)
> > Is there any progress on the buildd side to remove tzdata from the chroots?
>
> do you mean changing debootstrap such that the buildd variant is no longer
> includi
Hello Holger et al.
I was trying hard not to reply in this thread, but there are some things
that I'd like to point out and clarify.
El 10/10/23 a las 16:54, Holger Levsen escribió:
but why?
As Johannes has already replied, and I agree, there will be always
somebody annoyed, and we don't have
Hi,
Quoting Sam Hartman (2023-10-12 20:28:15)
> > "Johannes" == Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
> > writes:
> >> also because technically it's the right decision from the release
> >> team. these bugs are *currently*, in real life, merely cosmetic.
>
> Johannes> I disagree
> "Johannes" == Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues writes:
>> also because technically it's the right decision from the release
>> team. these bugs are *currently*, in real life, merely cosmetic.
Johannes> I disagree they are cosmetic or otherwise I would not've
Johannes> encou
Paul Gevers writes:
> I would hope that this is only one direction. Policy describes practice
> and is always (by definition) behind. So, unless the policy needs
> updating for something that we (as a project) learned to accept, I would
> hope that all policy violations are RC by default. Indeed,
Hi josch,
[Talking mostly as a fellow DD, just a tiny bit with Release Team member
hat on].
On 11-10-2023 13:31, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
There exist RC
bugs that the release team deems RC even though they do not directly violate
policy and vice-versa.
I would hope that this
Hi Holger,
let me re-order your mail so that I can reply in an order that puts more
concrete points at the top and lets my mail end with a more meta discussion.
Quoting Holger Levsen (2023-10-10 16:54:30)
> policy is not a stick to hit with.
I agree. I have not argued with policy in favour of th
Hi,
Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2023-10-10 16:27:02)
> Is there any progress on the buildd side to remove tzdata from the chroots?
do you mean changing debootstrap such that the buildd variant is no longer
including Priority:required packages? The MR for that is here:
https://salsa.debian.org/in
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 04:17:38PM +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
wrote:
> Those bugs were set from 'serious' to 'important' by Sebastian Ramacher a few
> months ago and I'd like to revisit this decision now that we are at the
> beginning of a new release cycle.
but why? IME people will
Hi josch
for everyone else, the context here is the thread starting at
<9b40f6f2-4942-acfc-2f9c-4668f05d9...@debian.org>.
On 2023-10-10 16:17:38 +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
> I'd like to get your confirmation that source packages that fail to build from
> source because they mi
Dear release team,
I'd like to get your confirmation that source packages that fail to build from
source because they miss to declare a build dependency on packages outside the
essential and build-essential set are actually of RC severity. The remaining
packages that fail this (mostly because they
12 matches
Mail list logo
