On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:37:22AM -0700, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
I would assume Debbugs might evolve without you having to personally
do all the improvements, if you allow improvements done by others flow
in.
As an example, I have had
https://salsa.debian.org/debbugs-team/debbugs/-/merge_requests
On May 27, 2025 20:57, Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote:
>
> Le 2025-05-27 20:08, tho...@goirand.fr a écrit :
> > THANKS. Indeed, it is annoying us a lot, Salsa users too, but anyone
> > sending us a quick email always receives a reply in due time. This
> > indeed is better than having b
On 27/05/25 at 18:46 +0200, Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote:
> 6. track merge requests.
Maybe something similar to bts-link[0]?
- add a new field that allows pointing to a merge request (similar to
the 'forwarded' field)
- have a bot that processes bugs with merge requests and adjust BTS tags
On Tuesday, May 27, 2025 4:07:11 AM Mountain Standard Time Léo Haf wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Léo Haf
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> * Package name: bitcoin-knots
> Version : 28.1.knots20250305
> Upstream Contact: Luke Dashjr
> * URL
On 5/27/25 10:16 PM, Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote:
I took note of some existing previous work for 3. (MUMI, DebGTD) that is
worth looking at though I could not find anything about "the return of
the Amancay".
Please consider https://fabre.debian.net/ as well.
OpenPGP_0x8F53E0193B294B75.
> > Debian has certainly done many things right in the past 30 years, but
> > treatment of new contributors is currently pretty harsh, considering
> > how many cracks and false turns they need to overcome on to become
> > regular contributors.
>
> The impact successive roadblocks can have on new co
Le 2025-05-27 20:08, tho...@goirand.fr a écrit :
THANKS. Indeed, it is annoying us a lot, Salsa users too, but anyone
sending us a quick email always receives a reply in due time. This
indeed is better than having bots spamming all of Salsa.
The delay is only a part of the issue, the other part
On 27/05/2025 17:46, Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote:
I'm considering getting my hands into that thing later this year, so let
me try to summarize the relevant parts of the previous threads (with the
intent of documenting this in a wiki page).
We would like debbugs to:
0. keep all the e-mail
Julien Plissonneau Duquène writes:
> I'm not suggesting that we simply drop manual approval, as I don't know
> of any automated and accurate method that could be used to prevent such
> abuse.
> I'm rather proposing giving all DDs the power to approve pending
> requests, and giving all registered
On May 27, 2025 19:17, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Julien Plissonneau Duquène writes:
> I would be worried about dropping the manual approval due to the sheer
> volume of sophisticated automated spam account creation attacks on any
> sort of authentication process with automatic sign-up.
Le 2025-05-27 19:16, Russ Allbery a écrit :
I would be worried about dropping the manual approval due to the sheer
volume of sophisticated automated spam account creation attacks on any
sort of authentication process with automatic sign-up.
I'm not suggesting that we simply drop manual approval
> I endorse basically all of this. (I had really hoped to be able to put
> significant effort into modernizing debbugs over the past year or so,
I understand time is always a limitation, but if/when you have time
for debbugs, could you please prioritize reviewing/merging the open
MRs?
I would as
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:16:25AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
I would be worried about dropping the manual approval due to the sheer
volume of sophisticated automated spam account creation attacks on any
sort of authentication process with automatic sign-up.
Right now, we are in the enviable pos
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 06:46:29PM +0200, Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote:
Unlike some people I believe that debbugs can be improved and
modernized in a satisfying way while retaining most if not all of its
current interfaces. This would minimize breakage and inconvenience for
developers that
Julien Plissonneau Duquène writes:
> I would first try to improve the Salsa registration process. I
> understand the need to prevent recurrent abuse, but the current manual
> approval process with its delay and lack of feedback when things go
> wrong is likely to discourage casual contributors, a
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 09:33:00AM -0700, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > > Question: Should uncoordinated NMUs unilaterally choose Salsa as the VCS
> > > > for a package?
> > >
> > > Why are you opposed to using Salsa as the VCS for cpuset? You use
> > > Salsa for many other packages and Git
Hi,
On 21/05/2025 17:48, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
Debian has certainly done many things right in the past 30 years, but
treatment of new contributors is currently pretty harsh, considering
how many cracks and false turns they need to overcome on to become
regular contributors.
The impact success
Hi,
Unlike some people I believe that debbugs can be improved and modernized
in a satisfying way while retaining most if not all of its current
interfaces. This would minimize breakage and inconvenience for
developers that are mostly fine with the way it currently works.
I'm considering gett
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:08 AM Ahmad Khalifa wrote:
>
> On 20/05/2025 15:06, Antoine Le Gonidec wrote:
> > If no one manifests any interest in helping with Mono maintenance, I plan to
> > start removing packages after the release of Trixie. Whatever happens,
> > *nothing*
> > is going to be rem
Le Tue, May 27, 2025 at 04:08:13PM +0100, Ahmad Khalifa a écrit :
> As upstream has moved around a bit, wouldn't it make more sense for mono to
> package the dotnet repository for Forky instead?
Since dotnet would not fit my needs (running non-free video games
relying on Mono), I plan on keeping M
On 20/05/2025 15:06, Antoine Le Gonidec wrote:
If no one manifests any interest in helping with Mono maintenance, I plan to
start removing packages after the release of Trixie. Whatever happens, *nothing*
is going to be removed from Trixie, but please don’t wait until Forky is almost
there before
On May 27, Léo Haf wrote:
Bitcoin Knots is a Bitcoin node that lets users be fully sovereign with
their money.
Can you avoid the propaganda in the description please?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Léo Haf
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: bitcoin-knots
Version : 28.1.knots20250305
Upstream Contact: Luke Dashjr
* URL : https://bitcoinknots.org
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: C, C++
De
Hello,
On Sun 25 May 2025 at 06:25pm +02, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 25 May 2025 17:34:58 +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin
> wrote:
>>(note that it requires /usr/sbin/sendmail by default, though there seem to
>>be options to use SMTP)
>
> The /usr/lib/sendmail interface is dying anyway, it doesn't pl
On Sun May 25, 2025 at 5:37 AM BST, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
Hi Steve and others with interest in wiki.debian.org!
Thanks for the ping. I was aware there's going to be a BoF, and
(schedule permitting) I hope to attend (virtually).
I've added some of the people who participated in
https://sals
On Sun May 25, 2025 at 4:41 PM BST, Richard Lewis wrote:
someone could, for example, make the bts support \ to continue a line,
that would benefit everyone without breaking anything?
This is a reasonable suggestion. I advise filing a wishlist bug to
request it (that is, if your mailer lets yo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Utkarsh Raj
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian...@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: rpp
Version : 2.0.0
Upstream Author : Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
* URL : https://github.com/ROCm/rpp
* License : Expat
27 matches
Mail list logo
