On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:58:18PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> hello (6.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * New upstream release.
>- Fixes a buffer overflow in excessively long greetings (CVE-2038-001)
>
> -- Simon McVittie Tue, April 1, 2038 09:00:00 +
>
> (I conject
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:25:37PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum
wrote:
> > UDD is the wrong approach. And also, ever looked at its
> > "db layout"?
>
> Could you elaborate?
UDD sprung to mind for me too. I'd like to know why it
doesn't fit for this use-case. I'd also be curious in an
armchair-sense to
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 at 11:21:08 +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Post-upload corrections?
I assume Charles refers to this practice: imagine I maintained hello, and
uploaded upstream release 6.6 without initially realising that it contained
a security fix:
hello (6.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
On 2010-02-26, Charles Plessy wrote:
> If the developments on changelog parsing introduce new requirements, in
> particular limitations on post-upload corrections, I strongly recommend to
> document this in our Policy.
Post-upload corrections?
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
Le Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:39:40AM +, Philipp Kern a écrit :
> On 2010-02-24, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Anyways, the thing is - data should be gathered where it belongs
> > to (and is processed anyways). changelogs and other similar data
> > actually are something the archive needs to process,
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:39:45PM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> FTP team and I are currently writing a new feature in dak which will
> collect changelog entries and store them in projectb, to be later used
> for other purposes (e.g. to write point release changelogs, see [1]).
>
> Colle
On 2010-02-24, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Anyways, the thing is - data should be gathered where it belongs
> to (and is processed anyways). changelogs and other similar data
> actually are something the archive needs to process, so storage is
> easy. Things like UDD should not generate it, but merely
On 24/02/10 at 20:19 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> FTP team and I are currently writing a new feature in dak which will
> >> collect changelog entries and store them in projectb, to be later used
> >> for other purposes (e.g. to write point release changelogs, see [1]).
> > Isn't this why we hav
>> FTP team and I are currently writing a new feature in dak which will
>> collect changelog entries and store them in projectb, to be later used
>> for other purposes (e.g. to write point release changelogs, see [1]).
> Isn't this why we have UDD?
UDD is the wrong approach. And also, ever looked
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:39:45PM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> FTP team and I are currently writing a new feature in dak which will
> collect changelog entries and store them in projectb, to be later used
> for other purposes (e.g. to write point release changelogs, see [1]).
Isn't thi
]] Luca Falavigna
| Can you imagine a useful thing that is worth having every entry in
| projectb? If so, here's your chance :)
Searching for CVEs springs to mind. (You can have one which only
affects the version in unstable, in which case it would never hit a
policy queue.)
--
Tollef Fog Hee
11 matches
Mail list logo
