Andreas Tille writes:
> In short: The Debian maintainer is responsible that a bug will be
> reported upstream. I don't see a problem if he delegates the actual
> work to somebody else who is able and willing to do the job (but
> please be nice to the user when asking for this kind of help). Free
Hi, Andreas:
On Thursday 13 January 2011 09:19:35 Andreas Tille wrote:
[...]
> In short: The Debian maintainer is responsible that a bug will be
> reported upstream. I don't see a problem if he delegates the actual
> work to somebody else who is able and willing to do the job (but please
> be ni
Hi, John:
On Thursday 13 January 2011 19:25:59 John Goerzen wrote:
> On 01/12/2011 09:35 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
[...]
> But still, let's say that a Debian developer has X minutes to spend on
> Debian a day.
Let's be true: it's not that a Debian developer has X minutes to spend but
that a Debia
Hi, Sune:
On Thursday 13 January 2011 00:12:06 Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-01-12, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
> >> I have considered to take this one step further. Close bugs reported in
> >> Debian BTS with a severity of important or less that is a bug that
> >> should primarily be fixed upstream.
On 01/12/2011 12:52 AM, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
I understand that maintainers' time is limited and that forwarding bugs
is not an enjoyable task. But I also understand that having a BTS
account for the upstream BTS of each of the 2405 packages I have
installed on my laptop (not to mention m
Le Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:35:06PM +0100, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel a écrit :
> Expected:
> 'Format','Upstream-Name','Upstream-Contact','Source','Disclaimer','Comment','Copyright','Files','License','Format-Specification','Name','Maintainer','Upstream-Maintainer','Upstream-Source'
> o
On 01/12/2011 05:59 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
Rather, I'm arguing that the maintainer role, as a mediator and
interface between upstream and the Debian user, entails a whole lot of
different tasks, and being a mediator in the discussion between
upstream-who-doesn't-care-about-Debian-specifically and
Le Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 03:06:56PM +0100, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel a écrit :
>
> Warning in 'License': key 'CeCILLv2' should match
> ^(?i:Apache|Artistic|BSD|FreeBSD|ISC|CC-BY|CC-BY-SA|CC-BY-ND|CC-BY-NC|CC-BY-NC-SA|CC-BY-NC-ND|CC0|CDDL|CPL|Eiffel|Expat|GPL|LGPL|GFDL|GFDL-NIV|LPPL|MIT|MPL|Perl|PSF|
Also, it's missing BSD-2-clause etc.
The original format from the wiki page uses comma to separate
Files. Might be worth detecting and converting those?
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Thanks for your work, here are a few things I stumbled on.
(Version: 1.229-1)
Worst problem: -save *removes* all Comment fields except for one
in the header section.
Also, -save converted in the header "Disclaimer:\n Foo" into "Disclaimer: Foo".
If I'm reading DEP-5 right, that's not correct, t
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:46:35PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Anecdote: while I was employed by Canonical I had to dissuade some of
> my colleagues from implementing and deploying, without consent from
> Debian, a feature in Launchpad that would automatically file
> corresponding bug reports in th
John Goerzen writes:
> On 01/12/2011 09:35 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > You are clearly adding value [… enumeration of many ways the
> > maintainer adds significant value by relaying bug report discussions
> > …]
> Those are some valid points, probably more valid for many packages
> than Bacula (f
Olaf van der Spek writes:
> That's unfortunately true. Why is it that bug squashing parties only
> happen a short time before release while it appears that the rest of the
> time the issue is ignored?
This didn't happen during this release cycle, at least from my
perspective. I remember lots of
On 01/12/2011 09:35 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Ben Finney dijo [Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 04:01:46PM +1100]:
(...)
I'm adding zero value here. Zero. It is a huge and frustrating waste
of my time.
Not in my view. I appreciate the Debian package maintainer acting in the
interest of “lower the barrier fo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alessandro Ghedini
* Package name: libhttp-tiny-perl
Version : 0.007
Upstream Author : Christian Hansen
David Golden
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTTP-Tiny
* License : GPL-1+ or Artistic (same
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:51:53PM +0100, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> On Thursday 13 January 2011 16:38:31 Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Please make your model recognize when a stand-alone license stanza is
> > present which defines a new license name in the file. DEP5 is not
> > intended to have an aut
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:47:53 +0100, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> The new version of libconfig-model-perl 1.229 is now available in Sid. This
> new version provides a model of DEP-5 updated according to the CANDIDATE
> version. (Among other features [1], like editor/validator for debian/control).
>
On Thursday 13 January 2011 16:35:06 Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
> I attached the copyright file
Interesting. Your file is formatted according to the spec archived on Debian
wiki. Looks like this spec was done before the DEP-5 work begun.
Since then, some fields like Debianized-* were dropped
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Pierre Chifflier
* Package name: sagan
Version : 0.7.1
Upstream Author : Champ Clark III
* URL : http://sagan.softwink.com/
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: C
Description : Real-time System & Event Log Monitor
Esmu seksigs latvju zaichiks. Esmu pieprasita pornozvaigzne. Ja tu veel
nezinaaji,tagad ir atverta man veltita majas lapa latvju meelee.
Ienaac un paskaties pirmaas 3 filmas no manas kolekcijas. Ists meistardarbs -
seksigi, atklati, erotiski.
Spied she: l a t v i a n p o r n s t a r .lv (tos t
On Thursday 13 January 2011 16:38:31 Steve Langasek wrote:
> Please make your model recognize when a stand-alone license stanza is
> present which defines a new license name in the file. DEP5 is not
> intended to have an authoritative list of all licenses in use, only the
> common ones;
Currentl
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 03:53:14PM +0100, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> > Expected:
> > 'Format','Upstream-Name','Upstream-Contact','Source','Disclaimer','Comment
> > ','Copyright','Files','License','Format-Specification','Name','Maintainer',
> > 'Upstream-Maintainer','Upstream-Source' or an acceptable
Le Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:47:53 +0100,
Dominique Dumont a écrit :
hello, another try :)
picca@grisette:~/Debian/tango/tango$ config-edit -application dpkg-copyright
-ui none
You should install Config::Model::TkUI or Config::Model::CursesUI for a more
friendly user interface
2011/01/13 16:30:47 In
Zitat von "Ansgar Burchardt" :
Sune Vuorela writes:
Currently, the debian Qt/KDE team has around 800 open, non-forwarded
bugs reported against their packages. I would guess that maybe 20 of
them is packaging issues. But we can't find them.
The rest of the bugs (780 open-non forwarded (and 300
Package: debbugs
Severity: wishlist
Tags: help
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> > I personally would love to see patches to the BTS to enable forwarding
> > these kinds of bug reports to upstreams more easily and integrate
> > ever
On Thursday 13 January 2011 15:06:56 Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
> Here the messages I got when checking my guidata package (already in the
> new queue)
>
> picca at grisette:~/Debian/guidata/guidata$ config-edit -application
> dpkg-copyright -ui none
> You should install Config::Model::TkUI o
Ansgar Burchardt writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> Ubuntu has a team (Bug Squad[1]) that tries to triage incoming bug
> reports, including forwarding them upstream when applicable.
>
> I don't know how successful this is, but if it has success, then maybe
> we could try to recruit volunte
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> The point is focus on solving bugs shouldn't be limited to BSPs and
> the end of the release cycle.
It never is restricted to just those times; it just becomes more
important as we get closer and closer to release.
Don Armstrong
--
This isn't lif
Olaf van der Spek writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> The point is focus on solving bugs shouldn't be limited to BSPs and
> the end of the release cycle.
No, Stefano's point was that if you want something done, you should go
and do it rather than whining here that it isn't being done.
Ian
Don Armstrong writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> I personally would love to see patches to the BTS to enable forwarding
> these kinds of bug reports to upstreams more easily and integrate
> everything tightly with the BTS. Unfortunately, I am perpetually short
> of time to implement them my
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Aleksandr Kuzminsky
* Package name: percona-server-5.5
Version : 5.5.8-20.0-1
Upstream Author : Percona Server Development Team
* URL : http://www.percona.com/software/percona-server/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang:
Le Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:47:53 +0100,
Dominique Dumont a écrit :
> Hello
Hello
Here the messages I got when checking my guidata package (already in the new
queue)
picca at grisette:~/Debian/guidata/guidata$ config-edit -application
dpkg-copyright -ui none
You should install Config::Model::TkUI
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Ben Finney wrote:
> But if they do refuse, then to what extent is that person
> accomplishing the maintainer role?
To the greatest extent they can, which is what all of us do. I don't
believe any maintainer is going to stand in the way of anyone who
wants to help triage their
Hi Steven,
On Thursday 13 January 2011 13.18:58 Steven McCoy wrote:
> A year later and I have a basic Autoconf/Automake system in trunk for
> OpenPGM ready to package for Debian.
Nice to see progress, note that I'm not involved in zeromq packaging anymore
(except to sponsor the odd upload) be
Sune Vuorela writes:
> Currently, the debian Qt/KDE team has around 800 open, non-forwarded
> bugs reported against their packages. I would guess that maybe 20 of
> them is packaging issues. But we can't find them.
> The rest of the bugs (780 open-non forwarded (and 300 forwarded)) is
> pure upst
On Do, 13 Jan 2011, Pietro Abate wrote:
> > My workaround was to purge network-manager and I'm planning to fix this by
> > creating a package which Conflicts: network-manager. Maybe you could provide
> > this kind of package by default :)
>
> I'm a very happy user of wicd. It works well to wireles
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:03:07PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>> > Remember: there is no shortage of bug reports.
>>
>> That's unfortunately true. Why is it that bug squashing parties only
>> happen a short time before release while
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:03:07PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > Remember: there is no shortage of bug reports.
>
> That's unfortunately true. Why is it that bug squashing parties only
> happen a short time before release while it appears that the rest of
> the time the issue is ignored?
Pl
Hello
The new version of libconfig-model-perl 1.229 is now available in Sid. This
new version provides a model of DEP-5 updated according to the CANDIDATE
version. (Among other features [1], like editor/validator for debian/control).
The DEP-5 editor must be run in the source package directory
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:58:30PM +0200, Anssi Kolehmainen wrote:
> My workaround was to purge network-manager and I'm planning to fix this by
> creating a package which Conflicts: network-manager. Maybe you could provide
> this kind of package by default :)
I'm a very happy user of wicd. It work
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Remember: there is no shortage of bug reports.
That's unfortunately true. Why is it that bug squashing parties only
happen a short time before release while it appears that the rest of
the time the issue is ignored?
--
Olaf
--
To UNSUBSC
Ben Finney writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> Ian Jackson writes:
> > But if a maintainer tells me "please go and talk to them yourself" or
> > even "please stop filing these kind of upstream bugs in Debian - you
> > know how to do it yourself upstream and I have enough to do already"
> >
Bernhard R. Link writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
> The maintainer should of course assess where their work is best invested
> and act accordingly.
>
> But a package where bug reports to Debian are not properly handled or
> users are required[1] to report them elsewhere is definitely not f
HI Adrian,
A year later and I have a basic Autoconf/Automake system in trunk for
OpenPGM ready to package for Debian.
I have a machine readable copyright file ready but pretty much stuck on
getting anything else working. The Autoconf system actually builds a
libtool shared library in addition
Szia!
Ez az elmúlt napok legfontosabb cikke az Indexen!
http://4szoba.hu/cikk/tippek/2308-gazarak-a-foldjen-jartunk-hogyan-lesz-annyi
Az Emfesz bedőlt, mi meg itt maradtunk a slamasztikában!
Olvasd el a cikket, mert fontos infó van benne, különösen a
végén lévő árakat bemutató táblázat! Itt f
* Ian Jackson [110113 01:54]:
> > We can't demand or require anyone to do anything. Yet we expect
> > maintainers to answer bug reports, provide packages, etc. The fact that
> > you can't force anyone to do anything doesn't mean you can't say that
> > some behavior is preferred or considered best
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-01-13, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>> We can't demand or require anyone to do anything. Yet we expect
>
> I think this is mostly wrong.
>
> We can demand or require people to step down. And we should if we don't
> think they do a proper jo
On 2011-01-13, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> We can't demand or require anyone to do anything. Yet we expect
I think this is mostly wrong.
We can demand or require people to step down. And we should if we don't
think they do a proper job.
Now we just need to define what a proper job is.
/Sune
--
Quoting Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk):
> On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 19:43 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > My plans are to upload before the end of the upcoming week-end an NMU
> > for each of the affected package(s).
> >
> > I currently have:
>
> fwiw, from a quick look at the list,
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:59:40AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
I really like Russ Allbery's sane words about this topic.
> To argue that is *not* to require or demand that anyone do any work, nor
> to strip anyone of their role. I wish I knew how to avert the seemingly
> ine
50 matches
Mail list logo
