Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocmal-fdkaac
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : https://github.com/savonet/ocaml-fdkaac
* License : GPL2
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-frei0r
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : https://github.com/savonet/ocaml-frei0r
* License : LGPL 2.1
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-opus
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : https://github.com/savonet/ocaml-opus
* License : GPL2
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings to
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-shine
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://github.com/savonet/ocaml-shine
* License : LGPL 2.1
Programming Lang: C
Description : OCaml bindings
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: shine
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : https://github.com/savonet/shine
* License : LGPL2
Programming Lang: C
Description : Fixed-point MP3 encoding
2012/3/18 Thomas Goirand :
> On 03/18/2012 08:53 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>> It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and
>> DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply
>> that knives are.
>>
> Well, the whole concep
2012/3/17 Arto Jantunen :
> Thomas Goirand writes:
>
>> On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>>> 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey
>>>
>>>> The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US.
>>>> This is a very different s
2012/3/11 Mike Hommey
>
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>
Hi all,
2012/2/18 Julien Cristau :
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 18:36:56 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
>> Oh, so OSS4 provides an Alsa API that is not compatible with Alsa's.
>> Awesome.
>>
> The oss4 package should die a painful death.
2012/2/18 Josselin Mouette :
> Le vendredi 17 février 2012 à 22:1
Hi,
2012/1/5 Paul Wise :
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>
>> I once proposed to push for a general policy regarding this symlink
>> trick for webapps and even to write a debhelper but it did not seem to
>> appeal to anyone. I am still convinced, t
Hi all,
2012/1/4 Simon McVittie :
> On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 at 20:20:42 +, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
>> Enrico Weigelt, 2011-12-31 03:55+0100:
>> > IMHO this is completely wrong, those files should be under
>> > /usr/lib/... or maybe even /usr/share/... as they're not
>> > dynamic data.
>>
>> Well, whe
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-gdo-npxpm
Version : 1.0~alpha5
Upstream Author : Matthew C. Gushee
* URL : http://matt.gushee.net/software/gd4o/
* License : LGPL-2.1
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-gstreamer
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL 2.1
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-lame
Version : 0.3.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the lame
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-dssi
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : gPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml interface to DSSI plugins
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-lo
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL-2.1 + link exception
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-schroedinger
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-flac
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the FLAC audio
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-voaacenc
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : CPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-mm
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL+link exception
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : Multimedia library
2011/4/4 Stanislav Maslovski :
>> I am not happy that network manager bypasses ifconfig to do this; I
>> would have much preferred a daemon that could properly integrate with
>> the existing infrastructure we had.
>
> Exactly. There is ifplugd that implements some of the functionality
> that is req
Hi !
Le dimanche 18 juillet 2010 13:41:10, vous avez écrit :
> Something to consider for Squeeze + 1?
Agreed. Just like you it seems at some point the installation would use tools
like dpkg and install according to the priority.
Nowadays, a clear setting where we select the tip of the i
Le mardi 1 juin 2010 12:12:23, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> I am not closing but downgrading for mediawiki, unless you prove that there
> is a real security issue.
Ok, I have looked at the source code. We use dvips to generate the postscript
file.
Does the issue happen for dvips ?
severity 584021 normal
thanks
Le mardi 1 juin 2010 06:17:23, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au a écrit :
> > I agree on all points of [Roland Stigge] ...
>
> Please read my reply to him.
Well, I still fail to see why you need to fill RC bugs everywhere. If your
rational for filling bugs against all pack
Hi,
Le vendredi 16 avril 2010 12:28:57, Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx a
écrit :
> The list of people voting is at:
> http://master.debian.org/~secretary/leader2010/voters.txt
(...)
> | 2009 | 1013 | 47.741 | 366 |361 | 43 | 35.636 | 7.56155 |
> | 2010 | 886 | 44.648
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-cry
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : Low-level OCaml implementation
Le samedi 29 août 2009 09:29:30, Ben Finney a écrit :
> If the governing interpretation is that “all copyright notices and
> distribution license” need to be duplicated into the file, how many
> packages in Debian are violating policy by this reading? More to the
> point, does this interpretation a
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:48:13, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> > That makes a difference in the sense that it helps to improve the
> > workflow by putting as much information as possible in the same place.
>
> Oh, for Pete's sake, just run zless on the file lintian already
> reports for you.
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 01:13:44, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:31:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> > Please file a bug (and patch) against lintian, I doubt the lintian
> > maintainers would have a problem with this as long as it is
> > implemented sanely.
>
&
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:31:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> Please file a bug (and patch) against lintian, I doubt the lintian
> maintainers would have a problem with this as long as it is
> implemented sanely.
Ok. Are the .desc files processed in any way ?
I looked at lintian's source and could find an
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:09:09, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
> Romain Beauxis (12/08/2009):
> > Is it foolish to propose this as a lintian check ? "Hey, standards
> > version is outdated, here are the changes that ought to be done"
>
> checks/standards-version.desc
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 23:22:45, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Romain Beauxis writes:
> > But there could be another use of this field, which would fit into the
> > test- driven workflow. What about a tool that displays the changes in
> > the policy based on the declared supp
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 04:59:09, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
> package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
> which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release, by
> forbidding the too old
Le lundi 10 août 2009 09:58:04, Jonathan Yu a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33:58AM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >> > The dh_make template for debian/copyright induces many
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: audex
Version : 0.71b2
Upstream Author : Marco Nelles
* URL : http://opensource.maniatek.de/cgi-bin/audex/audex/index.html
* License : GPL2
Programming Lang: C++
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: xmlm
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : Daniel C. Bünzli
* URL : http://erratique.ch/software/xmlm
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml xml manipulation
Le Wednesday 22 April 2009 18:52:48 Raphael Geissert, vous avez écrit :
> > I gave this example precisely because mediawiki upstream release
> > management is one of the most serious I know in webapps. And even though
> > they fix issues with care, and their code is surely very good, then this
> >
Le Wednesday 22 April 2009 12:35:12 Raphael Geissert, vous avez écrit :
> [Dropping -release and -volatile]
>
> Jan Wagner wrote:
> > Hi Romain,
> >
> > On Wednesday 22 April 2009, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> >> However, I wonder if this would need yet another
Hi !
Le Wednesday 22 April 2009 09:07:58 Jan Wagner, vous avez écrit :
> > I've requested a slot at DebConf to discuss this into detail, though
> > feel free to start a discussion already on debian-devel.
>
> sorry for coming around with another issue. While reading your comment
> without
Le Tuesday 07 April 2009 22:59:00 Sebastien Delafond, vous avez écrit :
> On Apr/07, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > While I see why it can be needed for python, I fail to see how it is
> > important for jruby...
>
> to have 2 versions of jruby available ? I guess so you can at least, for
> instance, try th
be done, to ensure the whole is consistent; and I expect the trailer
> line to tell me who did that work.
Couldn't this also be a line in the changelog ?
This is not a standard but this is done in many cases:
[ Romain Beauxis ]
* Upload to $TARGET
Romain
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
og. Also, it seems meaningful to me that the changelog is named after
the team, it seems to be equivalent to the real world "on behalf of the XXX
team".
A correct semantics could then be:
$PACKAGE ($VERSION) unstable; urgency=low
[ Romain Beauxis ]
* Did a very bad thing
-- Packa
Le Monday 06 April 2009 09:32:14 Matthew Johnson, vous avez écrit :
> > > Don't we have some install paths that still depend on LILO?
> >
> > Yes: /boot on LVM is the main one.
>
>
> We _certainly_ shouldn't throw it out if there are _known_ situations
> for which it's required.
>
> By all means
Le Monday 06 April 2009 08:18:33 Lionel Elie Mamane, vous avez écrit :
> My reasoning is that a package that has had only "team uploads" for
> three years is a package where effectively no human is taking charge
> for maintaining it, just as a package that has had only NMU uploads in
> three years;
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 16:45:59 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> > There was clearly a need for those GR, so raisong the number of
> > seconders would just have the consequence to prevent us from voting on
> > important topics.
>
> FWIW, it is not at all clear to me that there was any need for
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 16:18:46 Mike O'Connor, vous avez écrit :
> > I have several very small ocaml packages waiting in NEW for several weeks
> > now. I am upstream on these packages, and, honnestly, it takes few
> > minutes to check them (only 3 files of code in tarball).
>
> Of course, keep
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 11:08:28 Stefano Zacchiroli, vous avez écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:03AM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> > > Most of the time this is the case. But, if you upload a large, complex
> > > package, that might get passed by for a while so that several small,
> > > eas
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 04:57:39 Gunnar Wolf, vous avez écrit :
> > I agree. I fail to see where the GR process was abused. Since that seems
> > the main argument in favour of this change, I fail to see the motivation
> > for it.
>
> This proposal does not come from an abuse to the GR process, b
Le Sunday 22 March 2009 23:53:02 Bill Allombert, vous avez écrit :
> Furthermore I am a Debian since 2001 and I see no evidence than the GR
> process was abused during that time. On the contrary, some GR were delayed
> to the point where it was inconvenient for the release process.
I agree. I fail
Le Sunday 22 March 2009 14:45:18 Noah Slater, vous avez écrit :
> > Could you provide a use case or two to help clarify things? The main
> > one I see is for an end user to look at a packages copyright file and
> > say 'yes, I can use it for $foo', which is a case that's detracted from
> > in the p
Le Saturday 21 March 2009 15:42:35 Manoj Srivastava, vous avez écrit :
> Now, it might be perfectly fine for the ftp team to impose such
> restrictions on packages, and create their own policy; but please at
> least say so, and do not hide being hand waving of either copyright law
> requ
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:55:29 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort, vous avez écrit :
> > Since the vast majority of the packages fall into a regular copyright and
> > licensing, this would also mean overload the policy with stuff that is
> > only relevant in a very small number of cases in proportion.
>
> If
Le Friday 20 March 2009 15:54:14 Noah Slater, vous avez écrit :
> Not sure what else you expect someone to respond with apart from throwing
> their hands up and conceding that we should adopt policy to conform with
> peoples wish to avoid additional work.
You know, if you get some agressive answer
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:38:34 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> > But do you think this is possible ?
>
> Sure. Resolving this sort of thing is the point of the Policy process,
> after all, and we have a clear authority that does the enforcement
> (ftp-master), so it seems likely that we can re
Le Friday 20 March 2009 19:12:02 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> Maybe the best resolution to this is to have a broader discussion that
> leads to a rewording of Policy 12.5 that makes the requirements explicit,
> with ftp-master buy-in on what the requirements are?
> on the same page and every
Le Friday 20 March 2009 14:18:22 Mike Hommey, vous avez écrit :
> > This idea of a public reviewing page for NEWly uploaded packages really
> > looked appealing to me.
>
> On the other hand, when you look at projets such as Mozilla or Webkit,
> there are people already doing that upstream, or ensur
Le Friday 20 March 2009 13:07:44 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
> > different task.
>
> Do you really think we can find an unlimited amount of volunteers
> willing to continuously read thousands of files to find the
Le Friday 20 March 2009 12:55:05 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> > If that's too much effort for your, get a co-maintainer or a different
> > package.
>
> Fine. Do you have co-maintainers on sale?
It is not about co-maintaining, but about co-reviewing which is a totally
different task.
Ro
Le Friday 20 March 2009 10:58:53 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> Le vendredi 20 mars 2009 à 08:28 +, Sune Vuorela a écrit :
> > If anyone wants to actually try working with copyright files for one of
> > those "bigger" packages, Mike O'Connor helpfulyl just opened #520485 to
> > track one
Le Friday 20 March 2009 02:06:37 Ben Finney, vous avez écrit :
> > Is this the right way to spend developer time? as far as I see it,
> > developer time is our most valuable resource, and should not be
> > treated as such.
>
> Certainly, the time of people is valuable. I would like to see a
> forma
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-pulseaudio
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-theora
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net.
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the theora
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-samplerate
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-gavl
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.rastageeks.org/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis
* Package name: ocaml-speex
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml bindings for the speex
Le Friday 16 January 2009 11:51:50 markus schnalke, vous avez écrit :
> [2009-01-16 10:09] Neil Williams
>
> > The whole thing is a complete unknown.
>
> Of course you're right. But it's the best we have.
>
> Instead of leaving it with ``we simply don't know'', I prefer to
> estimate on the (unsur
Le Thursday 15 January 2009 23:25:02 Bernd Eckenfels, vous avez écrit :
> In article <20090115210004.gv21...@serveme.schnalke.local> you wrote:
> > My current guess is between 1/3 and 2/3.
>
> Machines or Users?
>
> According to Linuxcounter there are estimated 29,000,000 users and debian
> has 18.
Le Monday 29 December 2008 17:21:16 Theodore Tso, vous avez écrit :
> I do feel quite strongly, that aspirational goals, if they are going
> to be in Foundation Documents, must be clearly *labelled* as
> aspirational goals, and not as inflexible mandates that _MUST_ be
> kept. In politics, can hav
(Resending a previous private answer to Theodore since I believe it is
relevant to the discussion..)
Le Monday 29 December 2008 15:11:01 Theodore Tso, vous avez écrit :
> As I said in my recent blog entry[1], I believe that "100% free" is a
> wonderful aspirational goal --- other things being equ
Le Friday 19 December 2008 09:56:21 Johannes Wiedersich, vous avez écrit :
> What slightly upsets me about the issue is not what happened, but rather
> that the French appear so arrogant as to think what happened on a world
> wide announcement is fine, just because the French think it is fine.
I y
Le Friday 19 December 2008 01:04:05 Johannes Wiedersich, vous avez écrit :
> Joss, it is disappointing that after all that time since your faux pas
> [1], you still seem to fail to understand that what might be acceptable
> within one culture (I don't speak or understand 'French') will not
> necess
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 23:46:25 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> So, if I follow you:
> leather -> homosexuality
> homosexuality -> offense
>
> And by saying both of these, you dare say that I am offensive ‽
Well, you could also argue that "in intend to offend" means "pr
(I answer since there is a question adressed..)
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 22:01:17 Russell Coker, vous avez écrit :
> On Friday 19 December 2008 06:28, Romain Beauxis
wrote:
> > The initial proposition of this thread was this idea of code of conduct..
> > I don't li
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 19:12:29 Martin Langhoff, vous avez écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Manners, Josselin, and discretion. There are some places where it's just
> > not appropriate to blurt out whatever you're thinking.
>
> +10 from here.
>
> Of course,
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 18:21:48 Holger Levsen, vous avez écrit :
> To those thinking about expelling Joss, I'm in favor of this now. Trolling
> on purpose (repeatetly) for the sake of it is nothing I want to see in
> Debian nor do I want to see it as accepted behaviour.
You can't be serious.
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 18:08:00 Josselin Mouette, vous avez écrit :
> Le jeudi 18 décembre 2008 à 17:49 +0100, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> > I eat kittens at breakfast
>
> How do you cook them?
>
> I like European cats a lot, but I heard the Siamese meat is more tende
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 16:37:38 Johannes Wiedersich, vous avez écrit :
> Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > I'd argue about that "official" thing that people have been using to
> > qualify d-d-a. It's an announce list for developers, by
> > developers. I'm not sure what's official in there. I'd tend to
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 15:45:05 Michael Banck, vous avez écrit :
> > I'd argue about that "official" thing that people have been using to
> > qualify d-d-a. It's an announce list for developers, by
> > developers.
>
> Wrong. While in /theory/ it might be for developers, in /practise/,
> d-d-
Le Thursday 18 December 2008 13:04:24 Russell Coker, vous avez écrit :
> The above article concerns the damage that Josselin's actions cause to the
> Debian project. D-d-a is not that different from other parts of Debian,
> bad behaviour in other forums also hurts the project.
I have that feeling
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 20:30:22 Thomas Viehmann, vous avez écrit :
> But while you bring it up: I want a Debian where every Developer can
> cough up a minimal commitment to help with releasing. That is what "Have
> you fixed an RC bug today is about?". If all developers had fixed one RC
> bug
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 16:52:55 Romain Beauxis, vous avez écrit :
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/11/msg00046.html, no?
>
> I don't read "shorten" in this link, only "start".
Woops, sorry I misread "discussion" with "vote&q
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 16:50:52 Adeodato Simó, vous avez écrit :
> > Where did Steve shorten the discussion period? He did so for the *other*
> > vote, but I haven't seen a thread where he did for this one. (I may have
> > just missed it.)
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/11/msg0
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 14:55:29 Didier Raboud, vous avez écrit :
> > I think that the three existing flavours of debian already provide more
> > than is needed to offer comfort for both users with stability needs and
> > users with desire for new software.
>
> Actually, I would agree if you co
Le Tuesday 16 December 2008 00:29:21 Didier Raboud, vous avez écrit :
> > You can't get both recent *and* stabilized software. For a solid release
> > to be done, one needs to hold new improvements for a while.
>
> Yes. But there is a bunch of non-DD people that strongly want to use Debian
> and pr
Le Monday 15 December 2008 23:19:55 Bastian Venthur, vous avez écrit :
> > Note that forking+stable'izing Sid is what Ubuntu does every six months.
>
> Is that important? Unstable is frozen for nearly 1/2 year now, that's a
> problem we should try to solve if we don't want to degrade ourselves to
>
Le Monday 15 December 2008 10:36:50 Robert Millan, vous avez écrit :
> > With these hopefully solid plans in place for the release, we feel the
> > need to acknowledge that there is an ongoing vote whose outcome could
> > potentially disrupt them.
>
> Luk is referring to 11 bugs in linux-2.6 which
Le Sunday 14 December 2008 21:19:35 Andreas Barth, vous avez écrit :
> > FD will be a mess, but as I've previously posted, I believe that means
> > that we fail to override a delegate decision and hence the release of
> > lenny proceeds.
>
> Though I agree with that, voting for option 4 is even mor
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 22:15:50 Joerg Jaspert, vous avez écrit :
> Packages that only add new binary components are already sorted above
> packages that have completly new source, to decrease their time in the
> queue, as their checks are much faster done than a complete source
> review. But
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 16:33:15 Martin Wuertele, vous avez écrit :
> > Quality checks could be done later and this would ease the whole process
> > while keeping a focus where it is important.
>
> I completely disagree. It's a welcome benefit if packages of inferior
> quality are prevented f
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 14:36:39 Miriam Ruiz, vous avez écrit :
> > If people feel that a reviewing service is needed, we could split
> > that out of NEW processing and have a separate service (or just use
> > debian-mentors@ and http://mentors.debian.net).
>
> Yup, I agree with you. I think
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 13:34:06 Lucas Nussbaum, vous avez écrit :
> That's not true. We imposed that reviewing step to ourselves, and, if
> it's doing more harm (by slowing down development and annoying
> contributors) than good (by detecting mistakes and improving Debian's
> overall quality
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 12:07:51 Cyril Brulebois, vous avez écrit :
> Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (03/12/2008):
> > I've always wondered why it is not possible to add meta information to
> > an upload.
> > […]
> > In these cases, it would be n
Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 09:55:24 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> "Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is the NEW queue going to get processed any time soon? There's a load
> > of packages that are 3 weeks or more old.
>
> The NEW queue is constantly being processed. Unfortun
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: liq-contrib
Version : 08.11
Upstream Author : The Savonet Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : GPL v2+
Programming Lang
Le Friday 28 November 2008 23:57:09 Holger Levsen, vous avez écrit :
> On Friday 28 November 2008 22:42, William Pitcock wrote:
> > I think issues like these call for an unsupported repository outside of
> > Debian, but publicized within the community as an unofficial repository
> > for things like
Le Wednesday 29 October 2008 11:17:57 Norbert Preining, vous avez écrit :
> Anyone with a decent intelligent approach would ask the list masters,
> admins, whoever, and NOT post again on debian-devel.
I think that Charles meant that, even though someone makes a naive request for
which you -- and
Le Saturday 25 October 2008 18:36:33 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and
> > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce,
> > distribute
Le Saturday 25 October 2008 10:56:56 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit :
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Could you please elaborate here? The DFSG does not require us to have or
> > ship source code for non-program works, and if documentation is being
> > rejected on the basis of a *
Le Tuesday 21 October 2008 22:28:31 Lennart Sorensen, vous avez écrit :
> > If I recall well, one of the origin of the GNU fondation was the fact
> > that having free drivers alowed one to actually *fix* issues he may have
> > with his *own* hardware. Then, the very same reasoning can apply to
> >
Le Tuesday 21 October 2008 13:10:28 Peter Clifton, vous avez écrit :
> Having no source-code for firmware is hardly that different to having a
> completely open-source driver which does un-told magic by poking
> un-documented registers in a complex chip. Think Intel graphics before
> they released
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
