Quoting Steve Langasek (vor...@debian.org):
> A single package I'm comaintainer of that has a backports.org backport has
> received at least 12 bug reports to the BTS over the past year referencing
> bpo versions (not counting any that might have been retargeted using
> found/notfound after being
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:46:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > But when someone takes my package and uploads it somewhere other
> > than the main Debian archive, they incur *all* the responsibilities
> > of maintaining that package, including the res
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 08:57:56PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:03:56 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 05:13:14PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > > > Backports has now been declared "officially" supported by the project
> > > > > as a whole. Tha
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ray Wang
* Package name: mono-uia-atspi
Version : 2.1
Upstream Author : Mono Accessibility
* URL : http://www.mono-project.com/Accessibility
* License : MIT/X
Programming Lang: C#
Description : At-spi UIA source
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> If there's any complexity in the backport, that's probably true. But I'll
> note here that for all the backports I do for my packages, all the changes
> in the backport are mechanical (and automated) and maintaining that in a
> VCS is just mo
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> Just to make that clear: I did not talk about any burden for the
> package maintainers but the burden for the BTS
> maintainers/developers to add support for bpo. Whether or not the
> infrastructure for that (in the BTS) might be useful nonetheless is
>
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:03:56 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 05:13:14PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > > Backports has now been declared "officially" supported by the project
> > > > as a whole. That made it the collective responsibility of all
> > > > Debian Developers
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 15:18:26 Josselin Mouette wrote:
> No. gnome-user-share does not need root permissions.
I use kde. After installing your gnome-user-share it i couldn't find how to
start it. I found a configuration window but netstat -l doesn't show anything
listening.
Also no man pag
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 05:13:14PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > Backports has now been declared "officially" supported by the project
> > > as a whole. That made it the collective responsibility of all
> > > Debian Developers whether or not individuals in particular like it or
> > > not.
>
* Stephen Kitt (st...@sk2.org) [100907 23:27]:
> I agree, I don't think it would be appropriate to try to package the
> DFSG-free Windows software installable via winetricks (such as 7-zip); in any
> case, packaging winetricks needn't involve shipping random free software for
> Windows inside Debia
[sean finney]
> 1) split out the c++ libraries, make the c++ library conflict with the older
> version of libxmlrpc-c3 (conflicting files) make the -dev package
> depend on both libraries, and hope that a half dozen binNMU's fix the
> problem quickly enough.
> 2) do (1) but also fake a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tiago Bortoletto Vaz
* Package name: tinyeartrainer
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Jonas Wagner
* URL : http://29a.ch/tinyeartrainer
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Description : A tool to learn reco
Michael Gilbert writes:
> Doing a quick look at the backports mailing list archive, there are less
> than 10 bugs reported per month on average. That is for hundreds of
> packages. Doing some fuzzy math, if you have a package that got
> backported, you may see an additional 10/100 = 0.1 bug repor
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:13:15 +0100, David Goodenough
wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Then, in the usual Debian parlance, "nonfree" usually suggests
> > proprietary gratis distributable things. Winetricks includes a mix of
> > distributable, non-distributable and eve
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:48:09 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 04:18:48PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > Doing a quick look at the backports mailing list archive, there are less
> > than 10 bugs reported per month on average. That is for hundreds of
> > packages. Doing some
Steve Langasek writes:
> For the package in question, the backports are done by a fellow
> comaintainer, so I'm not complaining about the bug traffic; but that
> doesn't mean it's *right* for that traffic to be going to the BTS by
> default.
I wonder if we could apply some logic such as if the b
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 04:18:48PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Doing a quick look at the backports mailing list archive, there are less
> than 10 bugs reported per month on average. That is for hundreds of
> packages. Doing some fuzzy math, if you have a package that got
> backported, you may
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:27:47 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 04:18:48PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:56:21 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:46:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > > An alternative solution is t
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 04:18:48PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:56:21 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:46:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > An alternative solution is to just have reportbug mail the backport
> > > bug reporting mailing l
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:56:21 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:46:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > An alternative solution is to just have reportbug mail the backport
> > bug reporting mailing list, and have people bounce messages as
> > appropriate to the BTS.
>
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:46:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> An alternative solution is to just have reportbug mail the backport
> bug reporting mailing list, and have people bounce messages as
> appropriate to the BTS.
Imho, this is the most sensible approach for now. The number of bugs
Gerfried Fuchs writes:
> To me the solution is to see the person who does the backport as a part
> of the packaging team. There is the need for having a communication
> channel between the people anyway. Actually more and more packages are
> moved into team maintenance and I'm pretty puzzled abo
Bernd Zeimetz writes:
> On 09/07/2010 05:57 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> I don't think it is. I have no problem with people backporting any of
>> my packages that are useful to them, but I shouldn't have to read bug
>> mail for them. I have enough bugs of my own.
> Chances are good that htese
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Steve Langasek wrote:
> But when someone takes my package and uploads it somewhere other
> than the main Debian archive, they incur *all* the responsibilities
> of maintaining that package, including the responsibility of
> appropriately triaging bug reports and forwarding them
On 2010-09-07, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 09/07/2010 05:57 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
>>> That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by
>>> backports of your packages is quite an exception,
>>
>> I don't think it
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Hans-Christoph Steiner"
* Package name: pd-comport
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Winfried Ritsch, Institute for Electronic Music - Graz
* URL : http://puredata.info/
* License : LGPL-2.1+
Programming Lang: C
Descr
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Hans-Christoph Steiner"
* Package name: pd-ekext
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Ed Kelly
* URL : http://puredata.info/
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: C, Pd
Description : Pd objects for music information
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:05:29PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 09/07/2010 05:57 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> >> That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by
> >> backports of your packages is quite an except
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Hans-Christoph Steiner"
* Package name: pd-libdir
Version : 1.9
Upstream Author : Hans-Christoph Steiner
* URL : http://puredata.info/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C
Description : provides support for the
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 08:35:05PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> I really would like to see us trying to work together more effectively
> instead of objecting to things right ahead without even knowing wether
> it is such a big relevant deal to make a fuzz about. IMHO it isn't, far
> from it.
We
Lucas Nussbaum schrieb am Tuesday, den 07. September 2010:
Hi,
> > > Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes ("Backports service becoming official"):
> > > > Because of limitations in the Debian Bug Tracking System, any bugs
> > > > relevant to backported packages still have to be reported to the
> > >
Hi!
* Simon McVittie [2010-09-06 19:33:34 CEST]:
> On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 at 17:52:17 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > What are the BTS limitations ?
>
> I assume the relevant limitation is that in the BTS' data model, each source
> package has a single maintainer, whereas the maintainer of a
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:27:14PM +0200, Salvo 'LtWorf' Tomaselli wrote:
>> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:02:38 Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>> > What about using nc ?
>> > nc -l < /etc/passwd
>> >
>> > http://localhost:/ => bingo.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: yanone-kaffeesatz
Version : 2010-05-26
Upstream Author : Jan Gerner
* URL or Web page : http://www.yanone.de/typedesign/kaffeesatz/
* License : SIL OFL 1.1 (previously CC-BY 2.0)
Description : TTF and OTF font in four w
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 02:38:32PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> > time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> > personally prefer if we had the same r
On 09/07/2010 05:57 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by
>> backports of your packages is quite an exception,
>
> I don't think it is. I have no problem with people backporti
On 09/06/2010 10:46 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("normal" backport main
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Steffen Moeller
* Package name: paml
* URL : http://abacus.gene.ucl.ac.uk/software/paml.html
* License : academics only
Description : Phylogenetic Analysis by Maximum Likelihood
PAML is a package of programs for phylogenetic a
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by
> backports of your packages is quite an exception,
I don't think it is. I have no problem with people backporting any of my
packages that are useful to them, but I s
Am Dienstag, 7. September 2010 schrieb Kai Wasserbäch:
> Dear Hans-J.,
> I'm the maintainer of Skanlite (I assume you meant Skanlite). Skanlite is
> (AFAIK) the standalone "replacement" for Kooka, which uses libksane for
> accessing scanners. I started maintaining Skanlite, when I was missing
> Koo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-imagecache-actions
Version : 1.7
Upstream Author : Dan Morrison (http://drupal.org/user/33240)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/imagecache_actions
* License : GPL
Programming Lan
* Gerrit Pape :
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:34:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Gerrit Pape writes ("Re: dash Debian package - RC bugs"):
> > > I can't help, I don't understand. I yesterday followed up to a mail
> > > that was additionally addressed to the
> > > mailing list and got an automat
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:34:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Gerrit Pape writes ("Re: dash Debian package - RC bugs"):
> > I can't help, I don't understand. I yesterday followed up to a mail
> > that was additionally addressed to the
> > mailing list and got an automatic reply telling me that t
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-imageapi
Version : 1.8
Upstream Author : Andrew Morton (http://drupal.org/user/34869)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/imageapi
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Descriptio
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-imagecache
Version : 2.0~beta10
Upstream Author : Andrew Morton (http://drupal.org/user/34869)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/imagecache
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Le mardi 07 septembre 2010 à 11:17 +0200, Salvo Tomaselli a écrit :
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 10:47:08 Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Oh, please. If you want to setup such schemes, why would you not want to
> > spend 5 minutes to configure apache or lighttpd instead of spending at
> > least the s
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> I'm not planning to ever provide backports of any of my packages, and
> while others are welcome to do it, I do not in any way want to be
> bothered by their bugs or upload emails or anything.
Which would call for filtering, not for keeping the bad status
Hi,
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("normal" backport ma
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov
* Package name: drupal6-mod-lightbox2
Version : 1.9
Upstream Author : Stella Power (http://drupal.org/user/66894)
* URL : http://drupal.org/project/lightbox2
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Descripti
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:30AM +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 02:20:48PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>attached is a patch for lib64bz2-1.0 also.
>>
>>best wishes,
>>mike
>
>Thank you. I already knew it. Your patch is already in bzip2_1.0.5-5.
>I'm working o
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:54:37 Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> mich...@apple[12:50]:~$ uname -o
> Darwin
> mich...@apple[12:50]:~$ which nc
> /usr/bin/nc
>
> And, well, even a Windows version exists, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netcat#Variants
Have you considered how many windows and mac
Dear Hans-J.,
I'm the maintainer of Skanlite (I assume you meant Skanlite). Skanlite is
(AFAIK) the standalone "replacement" for Kooka, which uses libksane for
accessing scanners. I started maintaining Skanlite, when I was missing Kooka
from Squeeze (Kooka is the KDE 3.x standalone scanning applica
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:02:38 Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> > What about using nc ?
> > nc -l < /etc/passwd
> >
> > http://localhost:/ => bingo.
> >
> > We will probably not convince you, but there are way too many
> > alternatives to make the packaging effort worth the time.
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:27:14PM +0200, Salvo 'LtWorf' Tomaselli wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:02:38 Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> > What about using nc ?
> > nc -l < /etc/passwd
> >
> > http://localhost:/ => bingo.
> >
> > We will probably not convince you, but there are
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:02:38 Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> What about using nc ?
> nc -l < /etc/passwd
>
> http://localhost:/ => bingo.
>
> We will probably not convince you, but there are way too many
> alternatives to make the packaging effort worth the time.
you convinced m
2010-09-07, Stefano Zacchiroli:
> [ adding back the ITP to Cc: ]
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:56:15AM +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> > The default installation of lighttpd would put itself in the autostart,
> > maybe
> > i just wanted to share a file and it would take time for me to change
On 07/09/2010 11:17, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 10:47:08 Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Oh, please. If you want to setup such schemes, why would you not want to
>> spend 5 minutes to configure apache or lighttpd instead of spending at
>> least the same time to configure such
Le 07/09/2010 11:37, Holger Levsen a écrit :
apt-cache show sendfile gerstensaft
It seems to use its own protocol and needs special software on both
sides. On the other hand, wget or curl is installed on all systems...
and HTTP works also for non-Linux systems.
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRI
Hi,
On Dienstag, 7. September 2010, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2010-09-07, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> > time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> > personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages o
apt-cache show sendfile gerstensaft
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[ adding back the ITP to Cc: ]
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:56:15AM +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> The default installation of lighttpd would put itself in the autostart, maybe
> i just wanted to share a file and it would take time for me to change the
> configuration for avoiding autostart and c
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 10:47:08 Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Oh, please. If you want to setup such schemes, why would you not want to
> spend 5 minutes to configure apache or lighttpd instead of spending at
> least the same time to configure such an obscure piece of software?
>
> If all you car
On Tuesday 07 September 2010, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 09:20:21AM +0100, Chris Carr wrote:
> > If the new winetricks package were to be called wine-nonfree, that
would
> > lay the foundations for later efforts ...
>
> Except that it would be a serious misnomer.
>
> First, m
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 10:10:22 Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Installing lighttpd or something like it requires much less time than
> learning the existence of this one.
Not really.
The default installation of lighttpd would put itself in the autostart, maybe
i just wanted to share a file and it wo
Le mardi 07 septembre 2010 à 10:25 +0200, Salvo Tomaselli a écrit :
> I maintain a similar package (weborf), but yet with some differences.
>
> Weborf uses a basedirectory param while woof can use a directory or a file.
> Weborf will not limit the number of connections.
> Woof would tar a director
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 09:20:21AM +0100, Chris Carr wrote:
> If the new winetricks package were to be called wine-nonfree, that would lay
> the foundations for later efforts ...
Except that it would be a serious misnomer.
First, many of the packages there are free software. 29 out of 120, by my
Why have you CCed debian-devel? The rest of the thread is not on there. Please
stop cluttering -devel with separate mails on this topic. We have a bug number,
that's where discussion can take place, should any be necessary.
--
Jon Dowland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists
On 2010-09-07, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("normal" backport maintainer =
On Tuesday 07 September 2010 00:22:26 brian m. carlson wrote:
> We have a lot of web servers in Debian. Could you provide a long
> description for the package that helps an adminstrator decide why she
> might want to install woof instead of some other lightweight web
> server?
I maintain a simil
* Chris Carr (ranting...@gmail.com) [100907 10:20]:
> Are we in danger of making the best the enemy of the good? Packaging
> winetricks as-is would be helpful: making it a part of the packaging system,
> keeping it up-to-date, maybe adding a man page.
>
> Massive integration of distributable libr
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christian Pohl
* Package name: webhoneypot
Version : 0.1.123
Upstream Author : Johannes Ulrich
* URL : http://sites.google.com/site/webhoneypotsite
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: PHP
Description : The Dshiel
Are we in danger of making the best the enemy of the good? Packaging
winetricks as-is would be helpful: making it a part of the packaging system,
keeping it up-to-date, maybe adding a man page.
Massive integration of distributable libraries into wine, and/or the
creation of a wine-nonfree package
On Sep 07, Andrea Gasparini wrote:
> Brian, it lacks the long description, right, we'll provide one asap.
> Though, it serves just one file a given number of times, and then shutdown.
> It's something useful for distributing file in a LAN, if you don't want to
> install and setup a complete/com
Andrea Colangelo wrote, Tuesday 07 September 2010
> > * URL : http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/
http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/woof.html
Josselin Mouette wrote, Tuesday 07 September 2010:
> Oh yeah. We didn’t have enough webservers in the archive.
Joss, you could even be right,
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("nor
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider
Some other possibilities;
Move *-backports (and *-volatile) into the main archive like they are in Ubuntu.
Merge the backports website into www.de
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 06/09/10 at 20:32 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Lu, 06 sep 10, 17:52:17, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes ("Backports service becoming official"):
> > > > Because of limitations in the Debian Bug Tra
77 matches
Mail list logo
