On Monday 29 of March 2010 09:30:38 Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Вск, 28/03/2010 в 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет:
> > No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even
> > stabilized without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils,
> > app-admin/system-config- printer-common)
>
> I
В Вск, 28/03/2010 в 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет:
> No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even stabilized
> without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils, app-admin/system-config-
> printer-common)
If you know packages are broken why they were not hardmasked? If th
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 07:31:10PM +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:
> > On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random
> > php/perl library that's known to work.
>
> Have you ever just considered closing the
On Sunday 28 of March 2010 09:39:18 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some
> > random php/perl library that's known to work.
> How do you know it works if you don't test on the arch in question?
The problem is not waiting for some to go
st
On 03/28/2010 06:04 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
Basically you are saying that NONE tested that package on the arch until
the stablerequest. That's quite wrong and it should mean that the arch
should be ~ only, since they are stabling packages that they first
tested the day they stable them.
Well
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 28.3.2010 09:39, Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a):
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:47:27 +0200
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>> No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even
>> stabilized without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils,
>> app-ad
On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:47:27 +0200
Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even
> stabilized without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils,
> app-admin/system-config- printer-common) - I think it should be:
Well you'd marked them "~arch", right? Tha
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 07:31:10PM +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:
> > > On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
> > >
> > > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some
> > > random php/perl library that's known to work.
> >
> > Have you ever just consider
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 07:31:10PM +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:
> > On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random
> > php/perl library that's known to work.
>
> Have you ever just considered closing the
> On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
>
> It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some random
> php/perl library that's known to work.
Have you ever just considered closing the stabilization bug and ignoring the
arch. If they take so long to mark yo
On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:45:51PM +0100, Torsten Veller wrote:
> > * Petteri R?ty :
> > > So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch:
> > >
> > > In support (and my comments in support):
> > > - Can be used as a gentle reminde
11 matches
Mail list logo
