Hi,
On 09/04/23 00:32, Ravi Dwivedi wrote:
On 06/04/23 02:00, Ravi Dwivedi wrote:
Hi,
The following packages are ready to be uploaded (I also verified the
points listed on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship).
The package is required for gitlab 15.9.2
Could y
On 06/04/23 02:00, Ravi Dwivedi wrote:
Hi,
The following packages are ready to be uploaded (I also verified the
points listed on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship).
The package is required for gitlab 15.9.2
Could you please sponsor them?
ruby-aws-sdk-s3 1.
On Wed, Apr 5 2023 at 08:28:52 PM +05:30:00 +05:30:00, Ravi Dwivedi
wrote:
Forgot to give the repository link. Here it is
https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/mentors/ruby-aws-sdk-core
Uploaded, thanks for your work. Next time use ruby-team/mentors only
for new packages. For updates, you c
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023, at 3:30 PM, Ravi Dwivedi wrote:
> ruby-aws-sdk-s3 1.119.1-1 (https://salsa.debian.org/ravi/ruby-aws-sdk-s3)
1.120.0 and 1.120.1 have been released in the past few days [1] and GitLab
master's Gemfile appears to have already updated. [2] Would it make sense to
publish 1.120
Hi,
The following packages are ready to be uploaded (I also verified the
points listed on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship).
The package is required for gitlab 15.9.2
Could you please sponsor them?
ruby-aws-sdk-s3 1.119.1-1 (https://salsa.debian.org/ravi/ru
Hi,
The following packages are ready to be uploaded (I also verified the
points listed on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship).
This is required for gitlab 15.9.2.
Could you please sponsor them?
ruby-aws-sdk-core-3.170.0-1
Thank you!
---
Ravi Dwivedi
Forgot to give the repository link. Here it is
https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/mentors/ruby-aws-sdk-core
On 4/5/23 20:27, Ravi Dwivedi wrote:
Hi,
The following packages are ready to be uploaded (I also verified the
points listed on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Spo
On 04/03/23 12:25 am, Vinay wrote:
Hello team,
Requesting sponsorship for the package ruby-aws-sdk-core which is
updated to the version 3.168.4 required for GitLab 15.7.6
Requesting access to push to the repository [1]
remote: GitLab: You are not allowed to push code to protected branches
Hello team,
Requesting sponsorship for the package ruby-aws-sdk-core which is
updated to the version 3.168.4 required for GitLab 15.7.6
Requesting access to push to the repository [1]
remote: GitLab: You are not allowed to push code to protected branches
on this project.
To salsa.debian.org:
On Sun, Feb 19 2023 at 10:22:25 PM +05:30:00 +05:30:00, Vinay
wrote:
Hello Team,
Requesting Sponsorship for the new package ruby-aws-sdk-s3 (1.117.2-1)
This gem is listed here [2] and is a dependency of Gitlab 15.7.6
Uploaded, thanks for your work.
[1] hhttps://salsa.debian.org/ruby-te
Hello Team,
Requesting Sponsorship for the new package ruby-aws-sdk-s3 (1.117.2-1)
This gem is listed here [2] and is a dependency of Gitlab 15.7.6
[1] hhttps://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-aws-sdk-s3
[2] https://git.fosscommunity.in/debian-ruby/TaskTracker/-/issues/191
Regards.
*Vinay
On 01/01/23 17:26, Praveen Arimbrathodiyil wrote:
On 01/01/23 3:37 pm, Vinay wrote:
Hello Team,
ruby-aws-sdk-kms (1.24.0-3~bpo11+1) is required for ruby-aws-sdk-s3
in bullseye-backports-staging
Hi Vinay,
Please request access to upload to fasttrack.debian.net by opening a
salsa issue (l
On 01/01/23 3:37 pm, Vinay wrote:
Hello Team,
ruby-aws-sdk-kms (1.24.0-3~bpo11+1) is required for ruby-aws-sdk-s3 in
bullseye-backports-staging
Hi Vinay,
Please request access to upload to fasttrack.debian.net by opening a
salsa issue (link in the homepage).
Here is my fork [1]
Requesti
Hello Team,
ruby-aws-sdk-kms (1.24.0-3~bpo11+1) is required for ruby-aws-sdk-s3 in
bullseye-backports-staging
Here is my fork [1]
Requesting sponsorship for ruby-aws-sdk-kms
Reason for sending RFS is, the package is ruby-aws-sdk-s3 is listed here
[2]
[1]
https://salsa.debian.org/vinay-kes
On 26/11/22 10:54 am, Vivek K J wrote:
Hey team,
I've updated ruby-aws-sdk-core to 3.168.1. I'm a DM, but I don't
have access to upload this updated package. This package is updated for
updating gitlab to 15.5.1 [1].
Granted DM access.
[1] -- https://git.fosscommunity.in/debian-ru
Hey team,
I've updated ruby-aws-sdk-core to 3.168.1. I'm a DM, but I don't
have access to upload this updated package. This package is updated for
updating gitlab to 15.5.1 [1].
[1] -- https://git.fosscommunity.in/debian-ruby/TaskTracker/-/issues/191
--
Regards,
Vivek K J
Debian Mai
On ശ, ഓഗ 20, 2022 at 8:52 വൈകു, 'Tunji
wrote:
Hi, thank you for informing me of the oversight.
Kindly check again, I have now pushed the packed to the right
repository
(https://salsa.debian.org/thegodtune/ruby-aws-sigv4).
Uploaded both! Thanks for your contribution!
Next time try to l
On ശ, ഓഗ 20, 2022 at 4:33 രാവിലെ, 'Tunji
wrote:
Hi,
I just updated the packages
ruby-aws-sdk-s3 from version 1.48.0-3 to 1.114.0-1,
ruby-aws-eventstream from version 1.1.0-1 to 1.2.0-1,
and ruby-aws-sigv4 from 1.1.0-3 to 1.5.1-1
Please note that ruby-aws-sdk-s3 requires ruby-aws-sigv4 1
On ശ, ഓഗ 20, 2022 at 12:57 രാവിലെ, 'Tunji
wrote:
Hi,
I have updated the changelog as advised.
I still request sponsorship.
Uploaded, thanks for your contribution!
Thank you.
On 8/19/22 15:20, 'Tunji wrote:
Hi, I have implemented all the corrections stated, the package still
remains a
Hi,
I just updated the packages
ruby-aws-sdk-s3 from version 1.48.0-3 to 1.114.0-1,
ruby-aws-eventstream from version 1.1.0-1 to 1.2.0-1,
and ruby-aws-sigv4 from 1.1.0-3 to 1.5.1-1
Please note that ruby-aws-sdk-s3 requires ruby-aws-sigv4 1.5.1-1 and
ruby-aws-sdk-core 3.132.0-1 as it's build
On ബു, ഓഗ 17, 2022 at 7:03 വൈകു, 'Tunji
wrote:
Hi,
I just updated the package ruby-aws-sdk-core from version 3.104.3-3 to
3.132.0-1
Please update minimum versions of ruby-jmespath and ruby-beaneater in
Depends/Build-Depends. Also please doublecheck the line length of
changelog entries
Hi,
I just updated the package ruby-aws-sdk-core from version 3.104.3-3 to
3.132.0-1
Kindly check it out at https://salsa.debian.org/thegodtune/ruby-aws-sdk-core
I ensured that the package is Lintian clean
Kindly help sponsor it.
ruby-aws-sdk-core 3.132.0-1
Thank you!
OpenPGP_0x98CF7
El vie., 13 mar. 2020 19:40, David Suarez
escribió:
>
>
> El vie., 13 mar. 2020 19:32, Antonio Terceiro
> escribió:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 06:47:12PM +0100, David Suárez wrote:
>> > El vie., 13 mar. 2020 18:30, Pirate Praveen
>> > escribió:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 a
El vie., 13 mar. 2020 19:32, Antonio Terceiro
escribió:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 06:47:12PM +0100, David Suárez wrote:
> > El vie., 13 mar. 2020 18:30, Pirate Praveen
> > escribió:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:28 pm, Cédric Boutillier
> > > wrote:
> > > > Dear David,
> > >
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 06:47:12PM +0100, David Suárez wrote:
> El vie., 13 mar. 2020 18:30, Pirate Praveen
> escribió:
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:28 pm, Cédric Boutillier
> > wrote:
> > > Dear David,
> > >
> > > I am re-reading your mail
> > >
> > https://lists.debian.org/CAJg5+Z2
El vie., 13 mar. 2020 18:30, Pirate Praveen
escribió:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:28 pm, Cédric Boutillier
> wrote:
> > Dear David,
> >
> > I am re-reading your mail
> >
> https://lists.debian.org/CAJg5+Z2th-FNAxLNHb9+xkRz6O1RKb0RFxGCJ=yHOFSw2F38=w...@mail.gmail.com
> > about the status of
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:28 pm, Cédric Boutillier
wrote:
Dear David,
I am re-reading your mail
https://lists.debian.org/CAJg5+Z2th-FNAxLNHb9+xkRz6O1RKb0RFxGCJ=yHOFSw2F38=w...@mail.gmail.com
about the status of the various versions of ruby-aws-sdk.
As I understand the situation now:
- the
El jue., 27 feb. 2020 22:29, Cédric Boutillier escribió:
> Dear David,
>
> I am re-reading your mail
>
> https://lists.debian.org/CAJg5+Z2th-FNAxLNHb9+xkRz6O1RKb0RFxGCJ=yHOFSw2F38=w...@mail.gmail.com
> about the status of the various versions of ruby-aws-sdk.
>
> As I understand the situation now
Dear David,
I am re-reading your mail
https://lists.debian.org/CAJg5+Z2th-FNAxLNHb9+xkRz6O1RKb0RFxGCJ=yHOFSw2F38=w...@mail.gmail.com
about the status of the various versions of ruby-aws-sdk.
As I understand the situation now:
- the source/binary package ruby-aws-sdk-core v3, which was blocking th
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
Could any DD review and sponsor the upload ?
Thanks in advance,
--
David
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
Could any DD review and sponsor the upload ?
Thanks in advance,
--
David
On 08/01/2020 10:20, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 10:00, Matijs van Zuijlen wrote:
>> On 07/01/2020 20:49, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:16, Pirate Praveen
>>> wrote:
ruby-aws-sdk 2 -> 3 is huge change.
>>>
>>> It adds 220 new dependencies fo
On 11/1/20 21:09, Pirate Praveen wrote:
On ശ, Jan 11, 2020 at 20:46, David Suárez wrote:
Well, if you applies this, I dunno why the upload were blocked until
upstream CI of gitlab. If gitlab is in experimental, I dunno why it
should block any unstable (working and well done packaging) upl
On ശ, Jan 11, 2020 at 20:46, David Suárez
wrote:
Well, if you applies this, I dunno why the upload were blocked until
upstream CI of gitlab. If gitlab is in experimental, I dunno why it
should block any unstable (working and well done packaging) upload.
Because we actually run the upstrea
Hi,
On 11/1/20 20:29, Pirate Praveen wrote:
On ശ, Jan 11, 2020 at 19:53, David Suárez wrote:
Hi,
Any update here?
Utkarsh was looking at the upstream ci and possibility of fixing the
upstream tests. But I have uploaded it now.
So now, we have two broken packages:
- ruby-aws-sdk (exp
On ശ, Jan 11, 2020 at 19:53, David Suárez
wrote:
Hi,
Any update here?
Utkarsh was looking at the upstream ci and possibility of fixing the
upstream tests. But I have uploaded it now.
So now, we have two broken packages:
- ruby-aws-sdk (experimental version): broken to enduser who wa
On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 10:00, Matijs van Zuijlen
wrote:
On 07/01/2020 20:49, Pirate Praveen wrote:
On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:16, Pirate Praveen
wrote:
ruby-aws-sdk 2 -> 3 is huge change.
It adds 220 new dependencies for example.
https://rubygems.org/gems/aws-sdk-resources
gi
On 07/01/2020 20:49, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>
>
> On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:16, Pirate Praveen
> wrote:
>> ruby-aws-sdk 2 -> 3 is huge change.
>
> It adds 220 new dependencies for example.
>
> https://rubygems.org/gems/aws-sdk-resources
>
>
gitlab should probably only depend on the bits it us
On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:05, Utkarsh Gupta
wrote:
The MR has been created upstream. Link here[1].
NOTE: If this pans out the way it should, we'd need to update
ruby-parallel, too.
Thanks Utkarsh, some tests failed.
https://gitlab.com/utkarsh2102/gitlab/-/jobs/396211773
This could be a si
On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:16, Pirate Praveen
wrote:
ruby-aws-sdk 2 -> 3 is huge change.
It adds 220 new dependencies for example.
https://rubygems.org/gems/aws-sdk-resources
On ചൊ, Jan 7, 2020 at 20:41, David Suárez
wrote:
I mean, that it not breaks nothing, not for it was in experimental if
not for the version supported in gitlab.
From gitlab GemFile:
''gem 'aws-sdk''
Gitlab dit not provides any version, so I think we can bump aws-sdk
to v3 too.
ruby-aws
On 6/1/20 20:25, Pirate Praveen wrote:
On തി, Jan 6, 2020 at 20:12, David Suárez wrote:
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
It gets a new major version (1 -> 2), so they are not compatible. The
unique reverse dependency is gitlab (but in experimental version). So
it's should not br
Hi David, Praveen,
On 07/01/20 12:55 am, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On തി, Jan 6, 2020 at 20:12, David Suárez wrote:
>> Just updated the packaged in salsa.
>>
>> It gets a new major version (1 -> 2), so they are not compatible. The
>> unique reverse dependency is gitlab (but in experimental version)
On തി, Jan 6, 2020 at 20:12, David Suárez
wrote:
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
It gets a new major version (1 -> 2), so they are not compatible. The
unique reverse dependency is gitlab (but in experimental version). So
it's should not breaks nothing, except for end users of the
I forgot, it's tested in sbuild with gem2deb < 1.0.
The current gem2deb version (1.0), breaks all the ruby builds, so don't
scare, if it dont build atm.
On 6/1/20 20:12, David Suárez wrote:
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
It gets a new major version (1 -> 2), so they are not compati
Hi,
Just updated the packaged in salsa.
It gets a new major version (1 -> 2), so they are not compatible. The
unique reverse dependency is gitlab (but in experimental version). So
it's should not breaks nothing, except for end users of the library.
Could any DD review and sponsor the upload
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 03:05:11AM +0100, Tomasz Nitecki wrote:
> Hey,
>
> ruby-aws-sdk started to fail during CI run [1] due to ruby-json version
> requirement. This issue was (hot)fixed in Ubuntu version [2][3] so I've
> ported their patch to us. Additionally, I've refreshed the package
> (chang
Hey,
ruby-aws-sdk started to fail during CI run [1] due to ruby-json version
requirement. This issue was (hot)fixed in Ubuntu version [2][3] so I've
ported their patch to us. Additionally, I've refreshed the package
(changed vcs to salsa, updated dates and http links, etc.). Please
review and uplo
On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 12:51:02AM +0200, Tomasz Nitecki wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 06/09/17 15:11, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> > I uploaded it. I just added the Testsuite field in debian/control to
> > mark it as autopkgtest-able.
>
> Thanks! :)
>
> Just one question - if a gem/package doesn't contain a
Hey,
On 06/09/17 15:11, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> I uploaded it. I just added the Testsuite field in debian/control to
> mark it as autopkgtest-able.
Thanks! :)
Just one question - if a gem/package doesn't contain any tests, should
we always add 'Testsuite' field?
Regards,
T.
signature.asc
D
Hi,
I uploaded it. I just added the Testsuite field in debian/control to
mark it as autopkgtest-able.
Thanks for your work!
Cheers.
On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 02:56 +0200, Tomasz Nitecki wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 05/09/17 18:27, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> > I took a look on this package after your RFS and
Hey,
On 05/09/17 18:27, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> I took a look on this package after your RFS and most of the
> modifications seems ok, but I do not know why did you update the years
> of upstream copyright if they did not do it. Could you clarify it to
> me? Has some especific reason?
My mistake
Hi Tomasz,
On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 01:15 +0200, Tomasz Nitecki wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I've updated ruby-aws-sdk (new upstream, some minor changes). I'd
> appreciate if someone could take a look and upload it. Thanks :)
>
I took a look on this package after your RFS and most of the
modifications seems
Hey,
I've updated ruby-aws-sdk (new upstream, some minor changes). I'd
appreciate if someone could take a look and upload it. Thanks :)
Regards,
T.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
Uploaded!
Cheers,
Cédric
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
Any chance to get the package reviewed and uploaded ?
ruby-aws-sdk (1.64.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* debian/control:
- Update standards version; no changes needed.
- Add Conflicts: ruby-aws; Distinct implementation for same service.
* debian/patches:
- Drop 'fix-typo-in-
Hi,
El Miércoles, 10 de septiembre de 2014 22:24:36 Cédric Boutillier escribió:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 06:32:37PM +0200, David Suárez wrote:
> > All fixed :)
>
> The new version ships a lot of .yml files. I think that those should
> also be put under /usr/share/ruby-aws-sdk/api_config.
Change
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 06:32:37PM +0200, David Suárez wrote:
> All fixed :)
The new version ships a lot of .yml files. I think that those should
also be put under /usr/share/ruby-aws-sdk/api_config.
bin/aws-rb has a new --profile option that could be documented in the
manpage you wrote. (note a
Hi Cédric,
El Lunes, 8 de septiembre de 2014 16:25:05 Cédric Boutillier escribió:
> Here is a quick review:
>
> I think that it would better to place the files endpoints.json and
> ca-bundle.crt under /usr/share/ruby-aws-sdk. This requires to adapt
> use-correct-path-for-bundled-certificate and t
Hi David,
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 11:16:59PM +0200, David Suárez wrote:
> El Lunes, 16 de junio de 2014 21:24:13 David Suárez escribió:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Any chance to get the package reviewed and uploaded ?
> >
> > ruby-aws-sdk (1.43.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
> >
> > * Initial release (Cl
El Lunes, 16 de junio de 2014 21:24:13 David Suárez escribió:
> Hi,
>
> Any chance to get the package reviewed and uploaded ?
>
> ruby-aws-sdk (1.43.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
>
> * Initial release (Closes: #751676)
>
> It builds fine on a sid chroot.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> David
An
Hi,
Any chance to get the package reviewed and uploaded ?
ruby-aws-sdk (1.43.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* Initial release (Closes: #751676)
It builds fine on a sid chroot.
Thanks in advance,
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ruby-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "un
62 matches
Mail list logo
