Problems in the buildd network (was: Re: s390 not currently projected releasable)

On Wednesday 16 March 2005 06:20, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Another architecure that isn't keeping up to the 98% mark has a buildd > > mainainter who insists (to the point of threating) that I don't build > > and upload packages to help the build wit

Re: Bits from the CD team, 2005-03-16

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 08:13:25AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:27:37AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > Thus, for sarge, we plan to offer officially: > > > > * ISO images for business card and netinst CDs (for all architectures) > > * ISO images for normal install CDs

Re: debian/kernel security issues (Was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:38:48 -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:35:19 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:21:21AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: >>> Sven Luther wrote: > [...] >>> > >>> > This is not a ubuntu related problem though, and the help the ubuntu >>> >

Re: Bits from the CD team, 2005-03-16

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:27:37AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Thus, for sarge, we plan to offer officially: > > * ISO images for business card and netinst CDs (for all architectures) > * ISO images for normal install CDs (for all architectures) > * ISO images for install DVDs (i386-only pla

Re: Another load of typos

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 05:11:39PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:32:10AM +0100, Florian Zumbiehl wrote: > > HPGL > > HTML > > HTTPS > > These three vary because the letter H is pronounced starting with either > a 'h' (haich) or an 'a' (aich). This is _probably_ a distinct

Re: debian/kernel security issues (Was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:35:19 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:21:21AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: >> Sven Luther wrote: [...] >> > >> > This is not a ubuntu related problem though, and the help the ubuntu >> > kernel/security team has provided us was invaluable, but it should ma

Bug#299754: ITP: NanoBlogger -- small weblog engine for the UNIX command line

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: William Vera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: NanoBlogger Version : 3.1 Upstream Author : Kevin Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://nanoblogger.sourceforge.net/ * License : (GPL) Description : small weblog

Re: debian/kernel security issues (Was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:51:30 -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:50:22AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: [...] > >> To have proper security-in-testing-or-unstable for the kernel, the >> debian-kernel security team, or at least a few members of it, need to be made >> aware of the e

Re: Another load of typos

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:32:10AM +0100, Florian Zumbiehl wrote: > HPGL > HTML > HTTPS These three vary because the letter H is pronounced starting with either a 'h' (haich) or an 'a' (aich). This is _probably_ a distinction between American and British English, although it was originally a disti

Re: is xprint still used by mozilla, etc?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:30:50AM +0100, Jonas Gall wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:04:40 -0800, Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Apparently you missed the flamage when Mozilla's maintainer went insane and > > started requiring it. :) > That were the days of Xprint release 008 which was

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Anthony Towns writes: > The reason for the N = {1,2} requirement is so that the buildds can be > maintained by Debian, which means that they can be promptly fixed for > system-wide problems, and which means access to them can be > controlled, rather than opening up users of that architecture to >

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So if it has taken us 6 months to get the problems with testing-security > sorted out, what do you suppose we would have done for security support if > we had frozen and released six months ago, without first sorting out these > problems? Gone six mont

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Anthony Towns writes: > Here's one way. Let's say you're hacking on the Hurd. You've been in > the archive for a while on scc.d.o as a non-release candidate, and > just the other day you've finally managed to get it to run "ls" again, > and in the euphoria from that moment, over a single 48h hack

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Anthony Towns writes: > AFAICS creating a "proposed-updates"-like tree called "snapshot-s390" > for preparing a snapshot would be straightforward, if it would be > useful; and the snapshotting feature already discussed counts somewhat > as infrastructure support. One suggestion here then is for

Re: s390 not currently projected releasable (was: Re: Dropping from mirror network vs dropping from tier-1)

Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Another architecure that isn't keeping up to the 98% mark has a buildd > mainainter who insists (to the point of threating) that I don't build > and upload packages to help the build with its backlog and lack of > requeueing. So? A buildd maintainer do

Re: status of buildds?

Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:51:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > > The s390 porting team can perfectly well do what the hurd-i386 porting > > team does: build them themselves. I mean, umm, you don't have to be > > hooked into w-b to upload packa

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:00:13PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Once you start talking about having divergent packages between > architectures, a lot of the reasons I'm hearing from people about why > they want Debian to *do* releases for these archs seem to dissipate, > because they no longer ha

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 03:47:24PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:25:59PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: > > Can we *please* ban Ingo from d-d? He's been a huge pain in the ass on > > this list for months now, has absolutely nothing constructive to > > contribute, and is activ

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 18:02:07 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: [...] > This would be a lot like the current amd64 effort, but with more > formalized procedures. If the porters can't do it, their arch won't > block the release process, but if they work hard enough, they can > release together wit

Re: .d.o machines which are down (Re: Questions for the DPL candidates)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> According to db.d.o: > >The complete URL is http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi just for >reference. > >> - auric: RAID is dead (and auric is basically demilitarized since the >>compromise -- not even running a buildd, although I'm not

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Thomas Bushnell BSG [Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:20:02 -0800]: > Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The only differentiating requirement for scc, as opposed to the other > > "part of Debian" architectures, seems to be download share. That won't > > suddenly change. > You are incorrect,

Re: .d.o machines which are down (Re: Questions for the DPL candidates)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: >I have an e3500 to replace both auric and vore (and the raid), but I >haven't gotten an ok from James to do so yet. That would cut the number of sparc buildds down to one, when two are required for RC archtectures under the new proposal. -- Blars Blar

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:06:01AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Hi, Joey Hess wrote: > > testing-proposed-updates is _still_ missing autobuilders. > May I respectfully ask why that's been a problem for half a year now, IIRC? > It's not THAT difficult to set up an autobuilder. People have vol

Re: Bug#299724: ITP: groach -- pests such as roaches hide under your windows (xroach clone)

Wesley J Landaker wrote: On Tuesday, 15 March 2005 18:50, sean finney wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:18:43PM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: groach is a clone of the classic xroach program, but with multiple themes, more modern code, and a free license. why would anyone want to use this program

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:09:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > >>- the Debian System Administrators (DSA) must be willing to support > >> debian.org machine(s) of that architecture > >I assume people can help with this too, or? > > Doing DSA work involves more than having root on a random box on

Re: Bug#299724: ITP: groach -- pests such as roaches hide under your windows (xroach clone)

On Tuesday, 15 March 2005 18:50, sean finney wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:18:43PM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > > groach is a clone of the classic xroach program, but with multiple > > themes, more modern code, and a free license. > > why would anyone want to use this program? it's so..

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:54:33AM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > > For these reasons, I think the snapshotting approach is a better option, > > because it puts the package selection choices directly in the hands of > > the porters rather than trying to munge the existing testing scripts > > into

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Henning Makholm wrote: So how can an architecture ever become releaseworthy? It will not get release-certified before it has a a debian.org machine, and it cannot get a machine in debian.org before it has a stable version with security support, and it's not allowed to create a stable version and pr

Re: s390 not currently projected releasable (was: Re: Dropping from mirror network vs dropping from tier-1)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Why don't you start building packages yourselves? You do have access >to the hardware, right? It's supposed to be blindingly fast, right? Another architecure that isn't keeping up to the 98% mark

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Frank Küster wrote: Would the task of setting up an archive for the fixed up sources, and the resulting binary packages, be on the shoulder of the porters alone, or would there be support by the ftpmasters, and especially by the system administrators? Will it at least be possible to host such an a

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote: > The reason for the N = {1,2} requirement is so that the buildds can be > maintained by Debian, which means that they can be promptly fixed for > system-wide problems, and which means access to them can be controlled, > rather than opening up user

Re: The 98% and N<=2 criteria

Frank Küster wrote: For the porters to a specific architecture, this means they have an easy way to get nearer to the 98% and the N<=2 criteria: Just convince the maintainers of heavy-loaded desktop stuff, of big self-bootstrapping numbercrunching applications, and whatever, to take your architectu

Re: Back to basic (was: Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Thijs Kinkhorst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Example minimal quality standards: > - it should have a large part of the packages built > - there should be enough buildds to keep up with security and new uploads > within reasonable time. > - there should be some minimal team to support this archi

Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues?

Frank Küster wrote: I think all this discussion about etch should be delayed until sarge is out. Of course we would need a statement from the Nybbles team that they do not intend to make decicions, and not to settle facts before a thorough discussion has taken place - after the release. Meanwhile,

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

Mark Brown schrieb: On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:01:06PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: On some mirrors? -> Not all mirrors have to mirror all ports. The mirroring part of the proposal is effectively just a proposal to rearrange the archive in order to make this easy for mirror admins. [-snip-] [EMAIL P

Re: status of buildds?

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:51:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > The s390 porting team can perfectly well do what the hurd-i386 porting > team does: build them themselves. I mean, umm, you don't have to be > hooked into w-b to upload packages. I believe the wanna-build admins don't want

about Nybbles : how to keep all those archs releasable complying with the Vancouver Project

|* To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org |* Subject: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting |* From: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |* Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 20:45:09 -0800 We all have seen this proposal for "dropping architecture" and a lot of us are cryin

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Ola Lundqvist wrote: - the release architecture must have N+1 buildds where N is the number required to keep up with the volume of uploaded packages Sane. - the value of N above must not be > 2 Testing related. I do not really understand why this is a problem but somebody may be able to tell. Uh,

Re: Bug#299713: ITP: cvsfs -- Translator for transparent access to cvs repositories

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:52:11AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > cvsfs is a Hurd translator providing transparent (read-only for now) > access to CVS repositories by virtualizing the remote repository in the > local file system. Once translated, the user can browse around in > directories and view

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Greg Folkert schrieb: On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 00:58 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: Hi Aurélien, On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote: Steve Langasek a écrit : The much larger consequence of this meeting, however, has been the crafting of a prospective release plan for etch. T

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Scripsit Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:54:24AM +, Henning Makholm wrote: >> There is no visible reason why the solution has to include a ban on >> making any stable release for a minor architecture at all. > The question is, if we're not going to be releasing

Re: Bug#299724: ITP: groach -- pests such as roaches hide under your windows (xroach clone)

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:18:43PM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > groach is a clone of the classic xroach program, but with multiple > themes, more modern code, and a free license. why would anyone want to use this program? it's so... full... of... bugs... (/me goes and hides under an xterm

Another "mere user" comment on the non-released architectures proposal

Hello, this is my Very Humble (TM) opinion, as I do not have a significant contribution to Debian. First I have to say I understand the general spirit of the proposal. Releasing on an architecture means making promises to the users, for example that a significant portion of the packages in the

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:35:24PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Ports:I assume each is its own beastie. Each one is, but the one consistant thing I've seen across the various ones I've worked with is that they tend to be decentralized (that is, there is rarely if ever a 'p

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

#include * Joey Hess [Tue, Mar 15 2005, 07:40:09PM]: > > But considering the choice between releaseing Debian 3.1 with the new > > installer in 2005 or releasing Debian 3.1 with boot-floppies in 2003, it > > might have been possible finding some Debian developers hacking > > boot-floppies to u

Bug#299724: ITP: groach -- pests such as roaches hide under your windows (xroach clone)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: "Wesley J. Landaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: groach Version : 0.4.0 Upstream Author : INOUE Seiichiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : * License : GPL

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:40:09PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Not after October 1st 2003 it sould have been clear that the progress > > of the installer wasn't as good as expected. This was 2 months before > > the announced release date. > > > > What would have been a secon

Re: [RFC] OpenLDAP automatic upgrade

sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The first. Basically upstream changes the database format quite often. >> I am even not entirely sure if the database format stays compatible in >> the 2.1 or 2.2 line but I'd expect it to. The 2.2.23 Debian packages >> uses libdb4.3 instead of libdb4.2 a

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Hi, Joey Hess wrote: > testing-proposed-updates is _still_ missing autobuilders. May I respectfully ask why that's been a problem for half a year now, IIRC? It's not THAT difficult to set up an autobuilder. People have volunteered to work on this problem, including several who have already demon

Re: Key management using a USB key

hi, On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:39:44AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > > also, what about the library issue? > > > Which library issue? AFAIK the packages co-exist nicely. istr trying to build gpg-agent from the upstream source but the configure script would fail because i didn't have the appro

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Hi, Marc Haber wrote: > Since we're about Free Speech We're about free software. That's a subset of free speech. Disruptive speech is also a subset of free speech. That doesn't make disruptive speech appropriate in a forum which is about free software. One of the classic examples forced down the

Re: Switchconf: Orphaning or removing?

On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 01:01:15AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Hi, > > Some time ago, I adopted switchconf, a very simple bash script used to > simply switch between configurations, planned for use on mobile > systems, but perfectly usable on the desktop as well. > > Now, switchconf is too simple

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:15:46 +0100, Romain Francoise > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Can we *please* ban Ingo from d-d? He's been a huge pain in the ass on >>> this list for months now, has absolutely nothing con

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Colin, Steve, and I became release assistants when AJ posted a mail to > -devel asking "who wants to be a release assistant" and then gave us a > set of grunt-work tasks of increasing difficulty to do until he judged > we basically knew what we were doing.

Re: Vancouver meeting - clarifications

Marc Haber wrote: > The architectures you plan to release have a working installer, > anaconda, for years. d-i was developed to allow release of all > architectures. You are dropping that requirement, flushing all d-i > efforts down the drain. I didn't design d-i, begin to implement it, or lead th

Re: Key management using a USB key

Hi, sean finney: > > That has been agreed to. > > i didn't see anything to that regard in the wnpp bug... do you have > a pointer to somewhere that i could verify that? I talked with elmo about it in Barcelona, last December. He basically said that, as long as it's understood that he gets the p

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > Also i hoped the release team and the ftp-masters would have worked on > the current release instead of planing for the next on. Having all these > people together sitting in one room working on the current release would > have been much more prodcutive. > > Perhaps the

Re: Back to basic (was: Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:28:29PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Tue, March 15, 2005 22:50, Stephen Frost said: > > I'm not sure that we've entirely missed the point as much as we like to > > think there's a better solution than dropping all but 4 archs. > > Here's where things go wrong in th

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Adrian Bunk wrote: > Not after October 1st 2003 it sould have been clear that the progress > of the installer wasn't as good as expected. This was 2 months before > the announced release date. > > What would have been a second plan? > Nobody likes boot-floppies. > But considering the choice betw

Bug#299715: ITP: php-pear-info -- PHP library that show information about current PEAR install

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Polkan Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: php-pear-info Version : 1.6.0 Upstream Author : Davey Shafik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://pear.php.net/package/PEAR_Info * License : PHP Description : PHP libr

Bug#299714: ITP: php-db-ldap -- Pear DB compliant interface to LDAP servers

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Polkan Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: php-db-ldap Version : 1.1.0 Upstream Author : Ludovico Magnocavallo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://pear.php.net/package/DB_ldap * License : LGPL Description : Pe

Bug#299713: ITP: cvsfs -- Translator for transparent access to cvs repositories

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: cvsfs Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Stefan Siegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://cvsfs4hurd.berlios.de/cvsfs.html * License : GPL Description : Translator for transparent access to CVS repositories cv

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > How does one become an ftpmaster or release manager? How were the > current ones chosen? Do they simply choose their successors? Colin, Steve, and I became release assistants when AJ posted a mail to -devel asking "who wants to be a release assistant" and then gave u

Re: Key management using a USB key

hi matthias, On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 08:02:34AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > > - when gnupg releases an official version 2, james uploads a new gnupg > > that replaces the previous source package (or would it have to have > > the same name?), and generates all binary packages. > > > That

Re: [RFC] OpenLDAP automatic upgrade

hey, On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:02:23PM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > As far as I can see your are mostly targetting packages /using/ a > database? Good work so far looking at your text. The few database using > packages I tried to install did not work as good as I'd have expected... this is

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:25:59PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: > Can we *please* ban Ingo from d-d? He's been a huge pain in the ass on > this list for months now, has absolutely nothing constructive to > contribute, and is actively trying to subvert the project. How do you propose to 'ban' someon

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:41:33 +, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scripsit Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> You should resign from a job that only has a limited number of people >> able to do it. As a random developer, you're easily replaceable. As >> ftpmaster or security team membe

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There's no fixed number of slots associated with a job (apart from a couple > of constitutionally-mandated ones, but they have strict ways of getting the > job, too, so they're not predicated on "free time"). Nobody has to retire > in order for someone

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:54:24AM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> I would add as for the core set architecture: > >> - there must be a developer-accessible debian.org machine for the > >> architecture. > > This gets a little tricky for non-RC arc

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Scripsit Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 18:31:03 +, Henning Makholm >>My job is keeping me from working on Debian as much as I'd like. >>Should I resign as a DD? > You should resign from a job that only has a limited number of people > able to do it. As a random develope

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:59:00PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 06:31:03PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > > > > If his job is keeping him from working on Debian, he should step down > > > from his post. > > My job is keeping me from working on Debian as much as I'd li

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:04:09AM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> How could we know ? We know nothing about Ubuntu, nothing about > >> Canonical, nothing about the goals, nothing about how everything was > >> done to begin with, nothing about who works

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:32:16AM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > | How could we know ? We know nothing about Ubuntu, nothing about > > | Canonical, nothing about the goals, nothing about how every

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:31:34 -0500, David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >My interpretation of the announcement, and this also comes from talking with >some of the people involved, is that this affords ports with the flexibility to >do as they please without slowing down the rest of the project

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I definately agree with you on this. The way this discussion is going > atm is in the direction of finding solutions while the underlying > problems aren't at all clear[1]. > > [1] At least not to the developers at large. Andreas Barth has posted a goo

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 18:31:03 +, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scripsit Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:17:25 -0500, David Nusinow >>>We didn't "lose" him to Ubuntu. The man got a job and is busy. It would have >>>been the same with any other job that keeps

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:15:46 +0100, Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Can we *please* ban Ingo from d-d? He's been a huge pain in the ass on >> this list for months now, has absolutely nothing constructive to >> contribute, and is actively try

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:54:31PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > What will happen is something like this: > > A: "Oh, let's see what we got here a nice Alpha server..." > > B: "Let us install Debian on it!" > > *browsing the web* > > A: "Oh, no release of Debian for Alpha... it's unsupported.

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Hi Pierre! You wrote: > btw, I think that before making very huge plans, maybe an exhaustive > problems that have blocked the sarge release (like Adrian did) *is* the > way to go. I definately agree with you on this. The way this discussion is going atm is in the direction of finding solution

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:17:03PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: >... > > But really, is there much benefit in > > making *releases* for the SCC architectures? > > The packages will still be built and d-i maintained as long as there are > > porters interested in doing that work for the architect

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Reinhard Tartler | On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:11:01 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > * Hamish Moffatt | > | > | OK, that makes sense. Can you buy those architectures new? (Surely yes | > | in the case of s390 at least, probably mipsel also as the mips CPU | > | manufacturers a

Back to basic (was: Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, March 15, 2005 22:50, Stephen Frost said: > I'm not sure that we've entirely missed the point as much as we like to > think there's a better solution than dropping all but 4 archs. Here's where things go wrong in this discussion. I think the original proposal was (in retrospect) worded too

Re: Security support for tier-2

Hi, Brian Nelson wrote: > If they come to a > conclusion that it's impossible to make timely releases and keep all of > these architectures in a single archive, then that's their decision to > make. True. *If*. However, AFAIK they haven't done that yet. > If you care enough about a particular SS

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tuesday 15 March 2005 22:42, Brian Nelson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:26:58PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > > Hello > > > > As most people in this threas have expressed lot of bad feelings about > > this. I must tell that I think this proposal is a good step toward > > quicker releases e

Re: SCC proposal (was: Re: Questions for the DPL candidates)

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:06:35PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > I am of the opinion that the testing distribution has been a great > help in releasing. >... Is this just a personal opinion or backed by any objective evaluation? I'm asking because as I've already expressed my impression

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Can we *please* ban Ingo from d-d? He's been a huge pain in the ass on > this list for months now, has absolutely nothing constructive to > contribute, and is actively trying to subvert the project. For what it's worth, I second this request. -- ,''

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:14:50PM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Hi, John Goerzen wrote: > > > This specific proposal, for instance, is meant to > > provide us with a way forward that addresses the main concerns while > > still producing a quality, usable result for our users. > > It won't wo

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

Hi, John Goerzen wrote: > This specific proposal, for instance, is meant to > provide us with a way forward that addresses the main concerns while > still producing a quality, usable result for our users. It won't work that well for slower architectures, for the very simple reason that compiling

Vancouver hierarchy - proposed terminology

The debate is being hard to follow, with tiers, classes of citizenship and several other distinctions being tossed about, and not always clearly mapped to a particular one of the two divisions in the plan. I propose the following terminology (also paraphrasing the outline of the plan according to m

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

This one time, at band camp, Stephen Frost said: > * Stephen Gran ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > This one time, at band camp, Stephen Frost said: > > > The clarification made it fairly clear to me that if this is > > achieved by the porter team running clusters with distcc and magic > > smoke, and

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:01:06PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On some mirrors? > -> Not all mirrors have to mirror all ports. The mirroring part of the proposal is effectively just a proposal to rearrange the archive in order to make this easy for mirror admins. -- "You grabbed my hand and we

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:45:45PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > Hello > > > distribute for a SO arch). Anything past that is there just for QA > > purposes -- to make sure packages are buildable on these archs, and > > would be optional. > > This is the problem. How do you make sure that the pa

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:45:45PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > > The speed of buildd systems mostly becomes irrelevant. They will > > still have to keep up with base (the set of .debs that we do > > distribute for a SO arch). Anything past that is there just for QA > > purposes -- to make sure

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:55:08PM -0500, Alec Berryman wrote: > Ola Lundqvist on 2005-03-15 22:45:45 +0100: > > > This is the problem. How do you make sure that the package is > > buildable on the architecture without building it? And if you have > > built it why not just add it to the archives.

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

Ola Lundqvist on 2005-03-15 22:45:45 +0100: > This is the problem. How do you make sure that the package is > buildable on the architecture without building it? And if you have > built it why not just add it to the archives. :) So you still need a > buildd. :( Why not add it to the archives? Bec

Social pressure on mailing lists (Was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)

Norbert Tretkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Ingo Juergensmann wrote: >> Your wording is not on a level I would expect from a DD. > > And especially not on a level I would expect from someone who runs for > DPL. Ok. It's probably the case that I went too far there, and I do apologise for th

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Brian Nelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I agree. It's become quite evident that Debian is barely able to make > releases at all with the status quo. And, given a choice between having > no stable releases at all and having stable releases of a significantly > reduced number of arches, I'd gla

Re: Alternative: Source-Centric Approach [w/code]

Hello On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:25:23AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > As I have been reading the discussions about the SCC proposal for > etch, it seems that these are the main problems: > > 1) Difficulty with, and speed of, buildd systems > > 2) Difficulty of syncing testing across all archs gi

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

* Steve Langasek wrote: > The much larger consequence of this meeting, however, has been the > crafting of a prospective release plan for etch. Thanks to the team for your work on that. I support the direction of the proposal itself (modulo minor issues) and I hope that Debian reckognizes that

Re: *seconded* Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:26:58PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > Hello > > As most people in this threas have expressed lot of bad feelings about > this. I must tell that I think this proposal is a good step toward > quicker releases etc. > > With the clarifications (see the new thread) I must sa

  1   2   3   4   >