On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit writes:
>
> > No what we want is probably to be attractive to developers, while
> > keeping our standards about the stable release, which is what really
> > matters. And to do that, well, what we need is to make working for
> > Debian eas
]] Andreas Barth
Hi,
| Now my question is just: How to do that efficient? I.e. how would such
| a configuration file look like, and how the code to distribute the
| package on the most fitting buildd(s)? (I.e. it's better to waste 5
| out of 6 cores than to not build a package at all, but a pack
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 01:32:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> FWIW I think that "rolling" or "CUT" miss the point entirely. As a
> Debian user I use stable on my servers (with a few backports for the 3-4
> things I need bleeding edge for). For my desktop I use unstable, and
> when that breaks
On 04/30/2011 04:32 PM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> FWIW I think that "rolling" or "CUT" miss the point entirely. As a
> Debian user I use stable on my servers (with a few backports for the 3-4
> things I need bleeding edge for). For my desktop I use unstable, and
> when that breaks (which is *very* r
Pierre Habouzit writes:
> No what we want is probably to be attractive to developers, while
> keeping our standards about the stable release, which is what really
> matters. And to do that, well, what we need is to make working for
> Debian easier. Not harder. rolling is making working for Debian
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 03:09:48PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
> > libgcrypt has some horrendous bugs which upstream refuse to fix,
> > for example the broken behaviour relating to setuid binaries
> > discussed previously here, and the hard coded behaviour which
> > makes
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:48:22PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > "We might some day later change the way apt works for upgrades" is not an
> > argument for adding a pre-dependency now.
> But that we do want to prevent a broken APT -- when using the common
> "dpkg -i ...; apt-get install -f
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 02:21:40PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> In general we need to promote the reduction of (potential) bottlenecks
> in Debian rather than the contrary. ... and don't get me wrong: I'm very
> well aware that this specific "bottleneck" is a very good feature to
> have for t
* Pierre Habouzit (madco...@madism.org) [110501 01:32]:
> back a few versions. I couldn't care about testing any less. And at
> work, every person I know either uses just stable or does the same as
> me. I know no testing user around me. Of course I'm not pretending I
> know the absolute Truth, but
Hi,
I have a problem I need to solve in perl within wanna-build:
Sometimes we have a few packages we don't want to build on a certain
buildds. Sometimes this is because this package needs lots of ram. Or
it takes quite long and would waste the parallel building a machine
supports. Or whatever els
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:28:06PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Size is just one ingredient. There are plenty of other ways to diminish
> barrier to deploy big changes in Debian: wider commit access rights,
> larger VCS repositories, more liberal NMUs, etc. (Unsurprisingly,
> several Debian d
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:27:10AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Why would it be the release team's responsibility to cherry-pick from
> anywhere? It is the maintainer's responsibility to prepare packages that
> are suitable for the next stable release. I don't see why this would
> change.
>
Hi
On 30/04/11 at 17:24 +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Friday 29 April 2011 11:46:30 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 29/04/11 at 10:23 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > > 2. In the past there used to be two rather opposites use-cases of
> > > testing: some (luckely more than just the release team) see i
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:46:40PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> I expect the multiarch paths to replace the 'traditional
> cross-compiling' paths in due course for all target architectures,
> including ones that aren't Debian-suported (i.e currently
> mingw-whatever-you-call-it, avr32, msp430), for both
Your message dated Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:40:14 +0100
with message-id <1304196014.2833.57.camel@localhost>
and subject line Re: Bug#624713: general: linux-2.6.30-2 has no headers package
has caused the Debian Bug report #624713,
regarding general: linux-2.6.30-2 has no headers package
to be marked as
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 00:31 +0400, sergey wrote:
> Package: general
> Severity: normal
>
> I install Debian 6 from one of RC2 CD's. Kernel 2.6.32-5 want not
> work on my machine. But I was able to install 2.6.30-2 kernel, it works
> fine. But now I have a problem with this kernel: it has no approp
Package: general
Severity: normal
I install Debian 6 from one of RC2 CD's. Kernel 2.6.32-5 want not
work on my machine. But I was able to install 2.6.30-2 kernel, it works
fine. But now I have a problem with this kernel: it has no appropriate
headers package. Without headers I can't run VirtualBo
On 2011-04-30, Mike Hommey wrote:
>> Why not? Or - what is the blocker? (If there is some easily removable,
>> I'm happy to remove it.)
> Currently, if you upload something to unstable, well, you end up with it
> in unstable... I don't want that for mozilla.d.n packages.
Or maybe to clarify to An
Hi Neil,
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:48:24PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Indeed. Personally, I believe it would also be unreasonable to ask DDs,
> and indeed the release, security, and FTP teams to support testing and
> rolling. Especially before it has been proven to be negligible extra
> effort
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 07:14:57PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > So I would be opposed to making such a change in policy for the time being;
> > I think cross-compilers should stick with the traditional cross-compiler
> > directories and stay away from the multiarch directories until we have more
Hi Andreas,
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:29:22PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> But one can't expect that it's enough to say "great idea, but someone
> else will do it". If someone wants to setup rolling.d.n, fine. I'm
> happy to help setting up britney, release foo, whatever. But someone
> has to t
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 20:51]:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
> > start as a non-official service. As well as building packages in
> > non-free. And lots of other stuff which
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:50:39PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> 2/ The discussion is also about better supporting testing using t-p-u more
> extensively to bring important fixes (or important new upstream versions)
> that are blocked in unstable. It would be unreasonable to ask Debian
> develope
Hi Andreas,
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
> start as a non-official service. As well as building packages in
> non-free. And lots of other stuff which was implemented.
>
> Why shouldn't it work for rolling.d.n?
1/ Th
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:30:26PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 17:57]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Bar
* Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 17:57]:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> >
* Arno Töll (deb...@toell.net) [110430 17:46]:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 30.04.2011 16:48, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
> > start as a non-official service. As well as building packages in
> > non-free. An
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > > That being said, it would be really helpful to be abl
On 04/30/2011 05:46 PM, Arno Töll wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 16:48, Andreas Barth wrote:
Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
start as a non-official service. As well as building packages in
non-free. And lots of other stuff w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 16:48, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
> start as a non-official service. As well as building packages in
> non-free. And lots of other stuff which was implemented.
>
> Why shouldn
On Saturday 30 April 2011 17:36:09 Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/30/2011 04:24 PM, George Danchev wrote:
> >> - add a new 'frozen' suite, used only during freezes, to prepare
> >> the next stable release
> >
> > So, if I need to fix an RC bug during the freeze, I'll upload to
> > unstable, then rele
* Arno Töll (deb...@toell.net) [110430 15:17]:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 30.04.2011 14:36, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Feel free to use rolling.debian.net, set it up and have success. Like
> > aj did with setting up testing (after frozen has burned IIRC three
> > releas
On 04/30/2011 04:24 PM, George Danchev wrote:
- add a new 'frozen' suite, used only during freezes, to prepare
the next stable release
So, if I need to fix an RC bug during the freeze, I'll upload to
unstable, then release managers wait for it to enter rolling and
cherry-pick it from there; or
On Friday 29 April 2011 11:46:30 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 29/04/11 at 10:23 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > 2. In the past there used to be two rather opposites use-cases of
> > testing: some (luckely more than just the release team) see it as a tool
> > to develop stable. Others see it (mostly)
On 04/30/2011 03:47 PM, Arno Töll wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 15:24, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 04/30/2011 03:16 PM, Arno Töll wrote:
Perhaps that's a not a particular fair demand. See, crucial for
Raphaels idea as I read it is "official" support to users usi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 15:24, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/30/2011 03:16 PM, Arno Töll wrote:
>> Perhaps that's a not a particular fair demand. See, crucial for
>> Raphaels idea as I read it is "official" support to users using a
>> rolling distribution. For bot
On 04/30/2011 03:24 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 30/04/11 at 14:31 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 04/28/2011 08:20 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
The sooner we get the big transitions done, the sooner we can
focus on fixing the remaining bugs.
There will be always new transitions… you're gonna to w
On 30/04/11 at 14:36 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 14:28]:
> > On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 09:46]:
> > > > > Who is going to install a "rolling" release instead of "testing"?
> > > >
>
On 30/04/11 at 14:31 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/28/2011 08:20 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >The sooner we get the big transitions done, the sooner we can focus
> >on fixing the remaining bugs.
>
> There will be always new transitions… you're gonna to wait for ever.
OK, but I'm under the im
On 04/30/2011 03:16 PM, Arno Töll wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 14:36, Andreas Barth wrote:
Feel free to use rolling.debian.net, set it up and have success.
Like aj did with setting up testing (after frozen has burned IIRC
three release managers without an r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 30.04.2011 14:36, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Feel free to use rolling.debian.net, set it up and have success. Like
> aj did with setting up testing (after frozen has burned IIRC three
> release managers without an release).
Perhaps that's a not a parti
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 14:28]:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 09:46]:
> > > > Who is going to install a "rolling" release instead of "testing"?
> > >
> > > If we change our documentation to say that rolling can
On 04/28/2011 08:20 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
The sooner we get the big transitions done, the sooner we can focus
on fixing the remaining bugs.
There will be always new transitions… you're gonna to wait for ever.
Regards,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 09:46]:
> > > Who is going to install a "rolling" release instead of "testing"?
> >
> > If we change our documentation to say that rolling can be used by anyone
> > who likes a constantly evolving distributi
* Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
> >
> > Wo
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
>
> Would it work to build the packages in unstable? If so, why not
* Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
Would it work to build the packages in unstable? If so, why not
uploading them to experimental and re-branding them in mozilla.d.n?
And
* Stefano Zacchiroli (lea...@debian.org) [110430 12:56]:
> What we lack for that to become a reality is "just" the code. Marc and
> Tollef had set up a nice proposal [1] for GSoC this year and were
> willing to mentor it, but unfortunately no student has shown up. If
> there are people willing to c
On 04/30/2011 12:28 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Debian is perfectly good at holding the status quo - it's a
well-integrated, stable, mostly state of the art distribution
suited for almost anything you can come up with. Trying to repaint
one of the existing bikesheds with your new "rolling" colo
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:07:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Philipp Kern (tr...@philkern.de) [110430 09:49]:
> > It's not that it isn't meant. Of course we could also look at overlay
> > solutions. (That said, while I'm very happy about mozilla.debian.net, I
> > somehow still feel that tho
On 04/30/2011 09:45 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Who is going to install a "rolling" release instead of "testing"?
If we change our documentation to say that rolling can be used by
anyone who likes a constantly evolving distribution (and can live
with the occasionnal hiccup) and that we will do
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> In the last years, Debian hasn't been able to contribute any important
>> feature to the F/OSS distribution world - change (leading to both good
>> or bad results) happens at other places (name
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> In the last years, Debian hasn't been able to contribute any important
> feature to the F/OSS distribution world - change (leading to both good
> or bad results) happens at other places (namely Ubuntu) at the moment.
> I beli
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 07:48:54AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-04-30, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> >> People try out new things in experimental, and it seems to work mostly
> >> well to get new stuff migrated from there via unstable to testing onc
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [110430 09:54]:
> I think this is a fairly small portion of our developer base, and most
> developers do care about testing and pursue issues, particularly when
> informed of them by the excellent mail messages letting people know that
> packages haven't migrated as
* Philipp Kern (tr...@philkern.de) [110430 09:49]:
> It's not that it isn't meant. Of course we could also look at overlay
> solutions. (That said, while I'm very happy about mozilla.debian.net, I
> somehow still feel that those packages should be added in a co-installable way
> into some officia
Hi,
On Samstag, 30. April 2011, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> If we change our documentation to say that rolling can be used by anyone
> who likes a constantly evolving distribution (and can live with the
> occasionnal hiccup) and that we will do our best to support it, then the
> public of testing/rol
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110430 09:46]:
> > Who is going to install a "rolling" release instead of "testing"?
>
> If we change our documentation to say that rolling can be used by anyone
> who likes a constantly evolving distribution (and can live with the
> occasionnal hiccup) and
Heya,
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Raphael, it would be so great to reply to messages in single mails
>> instead of squeezing (are you release-themed, or what?) all of your
>> answers into one mail. I'm really tired of chasing a specific answer
>
On 04/30/2011 09:14 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
That said, we're lacking man power to fix bugs, I don't think that it
changes much whether the bug is fixed via unstable or via frozen.
Once we are to the point where we have been able to fix a bug in
unstable, it's usually not very difficult to fix
Le Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:20:31PM +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
>
> This concept needs double or tripple man power from what we currently
> have. That's the show-stopper.
Hi all,
one way to increase the manpower is to give more permissions to the package
maintainers.
For instance, one could i
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> Right now, a maintainer can legitimately ignore testing until freeze
> because Debian does not support testing, testing is just a tool to
> prepare a release. I want to change that and never hear that objection
> again. I want that new maintainers that join Debian know
On 2011-04-30, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> People try out new things in experimental, and it seems to work mostly
>> well to get new stuff migrated from there via unstable to testing once
>> the release is done (except that we try to not do too many things
Hi,
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Heya,
>
> Raphael, it would be so great to reply to messages in single mails
> instead of squeezing (are you release-themed, or what?) all of your
> answers into one mail. I'm really tired of chasing a specific answer
> From you through the
Hi!
(accumulated replies FTW)
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:20:31PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * unstable always feeds to testing
> > * "release N" == "testing", until the "freeze".
>
> You know that we had once "frozen", and have given up since as that
> didn't scale even back then?
I thin
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> People try out new things in experimental, and it seems to work mostly
> well to get new stuff migrated from there via unstable to testing once
> the release is done (except that we try to not do too many things in
> parallel - and things have improved wi
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Good. I just want to point out that "frozen" built on top on rolling
> > (which is what we're proposing here) is different from "frozen" built on
> > top of unstable (which is what we had before the introduction of testing).
>
> The main drawback for f
Hi,
Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> Eh? How do you fix stuff in the next release if you don't make uploads?
> I'm not saying that the number of uploads should stay the same: it's
> normal to see it going down during freezes, since there are less things
> to change. However, if we think that DDs particip
68 matches
Mail list logo
