On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:22:01AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > People still would need to build the packages fully to make sure it
> > works before it would be accepted, but after that, it will be fully
> > autobuilt for all arches.
> >
> > I
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> People still would need to build the packages fully to make sure it
> works before it would be accepted, but after that, it will be fully
> autobuilt for all arches.
>
> I guess the changes file would need to contain a flag or something to
> make sure tha
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:35:59AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Packages entering sid should be checked for uninstallability (caused by
> depends on outdated libs) and a rebuild should probabily triggered in
> some sane way (i.e. wait for the arch to get uptodate on the failed
> lib and th
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 09:47:16AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Steve Langasek
>
> | Er. You're going to hold NMUers responsible for the general crappy
> | state of a package before they got to it?
>
> No, but a package might be broken in other subtle ways because of the
> NMU, like broken
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Steve Langasek
>
> | Er. You're going to hold NMUers responsible for the general crappy
> | state of a package before they got to it?
>
> No, but a package might be broken in other subtle ways because of the
> NMU, like broken build-environment.
* Steve Langasek
| Er. You're going to hold NMUers responsible for the general crappy
| state of a package before they got to it?
No, but a package might be broken in other subtle ways because of the
NMU, like broken build-environment. If you upload a package which
doesn't work (even though th
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Christian Perrier wrote:
> And, as Steve pointed out, translation stuff is minimalistically
> invasive so this does not require an enormous amount of attention
> after the NMU.
Yes, but there are new libraries that get linked to, new compilers, etc.
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Er. You're going to hold NMUers responsible for the general crappy
> state of a package before they got to it? Are you also going to concede
> to them the authority to request the package's removal from the archive
> without the maintainer's consent,
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 05:17:54PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > And, as Steve pointed out, translation stuff is minimalistically
> > invasive so this does not require an enormous amount of attention
> > after the NMU.
> When you do an NMU you're taking the responsibility to maintain the
> packa
Looks like it's time to drop down this one... :-). Such debate with
strong opposition would now need a meeting around a beer : we've
reached the point where none of us will move anymore.. :-)
* Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Except what you don't realize is that one should never, ever, ever just
> > NMU and then forget about the package. If you do an NMU then you need
> > to make sure it worked, follow the package and ma
Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Except what you don't realize is that one should never, ever, ever just
> NMU and then forget about the package. If you do an NMU then you need
> to make sure it worked, follow the package and make sure there aren't
> problems with it and follow up wit
* Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > > I, for sure, cannot hijack any package for which nothing has been done
> > > for translation related bugs. I would quickly end up with dozens of
> > > packages I'm responsible for, the majority of w
Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I, for sure, cannot hijack any package for which nothing has been done
> > for translation related bugs. I would quickly end up with dozens of
> > packages I'm responsible for, the majority of which I'm perfectly
> > unable to maintain.
>
> If you ca
* Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I feel this is utter bullshit, personally. One shouldn't be NMU'ing for
> > wishlist bugs. If the package isn't maintained then hijack it instead.
> > If you don't have time to do that then there's no
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:55:51AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > We'll start with french translations. Not a lot of them are sleeping,
> > because we already pissed off some maintainers, or even did some NMU's
> > (yes, for wishlist bugs...).
> I
Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I feel this is utter bullshit, personally. One shouldn't be NMU'ing for
> wishlist bugs. If the package isn't maintained then hijack it instead.
> If you don't have time to do that then there's no way in hell you should
> be NMU'ing it anyway. If no
* Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> We'll start with french translations. Not a lot of them are sleeping,
> because we already pissed off some maintainers, or even did some NMU's
> (yes, for wishlist bugs...).
I feel this is utter bullshit, personally. One shouldn't be NMU'ing for
wi
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quoting Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Eh. Personally I tend to doubt it's lack of trust that's causing
> > translations to rot in the BTS.
>
> As far as I know this is more maintainer laziness, for sure.. :-)
>
> I guess that in the fu
19 matches
Mail list logo
