On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> >Another, perhaps more parseable format, would be:
> >
> > X-VCS-Url: ${VCS}:${URL}
> > X-Vcs-Url: bzr:http://people.debian.org/~adeodato/code/packages/taglib
> >
> >Though you'd had to wonder what you'd do with a svn:// url.
> >
>
> Looks good, but i
"Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Due to the "my stuff, don't touch that!" current approach, but (again)
> this is just IMHO.
I have had people insist that I needed to maintain a package
differently, but they have all been strangely unwilling to post
clear applyable patches or make N
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:30:34 +0300, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> IMHO the maintainer(s) could mention their wishes wrt to NMU and any
> particular package in debian/copyright, right after This package was
> debianized by ... When needed NMU is appreciated/forbidden/whatever
I agree
On Monday 31 July 2006 18:43, Hubert Chan wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 11:40:54 -0300, "Gustavo Franco"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On 7/31/06, Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, "Gustavo Franco"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 11:40:54 -0300, "Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/31/06, Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, "Gustavo Franco"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > The packages that aren't under group maintenance and will nev
On 7/31/06, Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, "Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> The packages that aren't under group maintenance and will never be,
> needs more not so strict NMU rules.
Why?
Due to the "my stuff, don't touch that!" c
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, "Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> The packages that aren't under group maintenance and will never be,
> needs more not so strict NMU rules.
Why?
--
Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, and we could start by really enforcing co-maintainership. Make it 100%
> mandatory for all essential, required and base packages at first.
There are many ways of working together with people, and
co-maintainership works well for some
On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:20:35 +, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I'm not here for push "new upstream releases" into your packages,
> for example. We're talking about bug fixing and better integration,
> eg: better hardware sup
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:20:35 +, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I'm not here for push "new upstream releases" into your packages,
> for example. We're talking about bug fixing and better integration,
> eg: better hardware support, as Anthony pointed out.
Even then, there
On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +, Gustavo Franco
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
> I wrote that it c
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +, Gustavo Franco
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
> I wrote that it could be integrated with PTS, somebody else
> suggested
On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +, Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300, Gustavo Franco
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > * Promote NMU
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +, Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300, Gustavo Franco
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official
>> > st
On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
What does this mean?
That you're out of date on what's going on and trying to mak
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 04:26:33AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> (Format: X-Vcs-${VCS}: ${URL})
> X-Vcs-Bzr: http://people.debian.org/~adeodato/code/packages/taglib
>
> Another, perhaps more parseable format, would be:
>
> X-VCS-Url: ${VCS}:${URL}
> X-Vcs-Url: bzr:http://people.debian.org
On Friday 28 July 2006 22:06, Katrina Jackson wrote:
> Okay here is another honest question: Do you really honestly think not
> having co-maintainers for base packages is ever a good idea? What if
> someone is busy? You don't really feel safe noticing your base packages
> aren't being co-main
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
What does this mean?
> For existing packages:
> * The package that contains only the Maintainer field with the name
> of a person and n
On 7/29/06, Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Thomas Viehmann [Fri, 28 Jul 2006 23:40:19 +0200]:
> If that is wanted, I'd consider it important enough information to have
> it in debian/control.
A couple packages of mine ship already with an X-VCS-Bzr header in the
source. Example:
* Thomas Viehmann [Fri, 28 Jul 2006 23:40:19 +0200]:
> If that is wanted, I'd consider it important enough information to have
> it in debian/control.
A couple packages of mine ship already with an X-VCS-Bzr header in the
source. Example:
(Format: X-Vcs-${VCS}: ${URL})
X-Vcs-Bzr: http://peop
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:06:05PM -0600, Katrina Jackson wrote:
> Okay here is another honest question: Do you really honestly think not
> having co-maintainers for base packages is ever a good idea? What if
> someone is busy? You don't really feel safe noticing your base packages
> aren't b
Simon Richter wrote:
> I propose that under that policy, if someone NMUs a package without
> clearing the patch with the maintainer first, that person is responsible
> for the package until the maintainer acknowledges or reverts the NMU.
Isn't that more or less the status quo already?
As in:
Fol
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> * Are you working on the package foo ?
>
> In a scenario when anybody or tons of people can upload the package foo,
> it's necessary to tag somewhere that you're working on the package foo.
> Groups do it using IRC or wiki articles today. We could do it using the
> NEWS in
On 7/28/06, Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> * The package that contains only the Maintainer field with the name of
> a person and not a group can be uploaded by any DD. ping the current
> maintainer is good but not required;
I propose that under that pol
Hello,
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> * The package that contains only the Maintainer field with the name of
> a person and not a group can be uploaded by any DD. ping the current
> maintainer is good but not required;
I propose that under that policy, if someone NMUs a package without
clearing the pat
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I meant with group of maintainers, number of uploaders > 1. Joerg
> Jaspert said that he wouldn't like to be forced to team maintenance
> and suggested 0day NMUs for >= normal bugs with current rules (patch
> to the bts), so if you add this rule to my suggestion, i think it
On 7/28/06, Daniel Baumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> For existing packages:
>
> * The package that contains only the Maintainer field with the name of
> a person and not a group can be uploaded by any DD. ping the current
> maintainer is good but not required;
then I wil
Gustavo Franco wrote:
> For existing packages:
>
> * The package that contains only the Maintainer field with the name of
> a person and not a group can be uploaded by any DD. ping the current
> maintainer is good but not required;
then I will have to found a 'these-are-daniels-packages'-group
co
On 7/28/06, Katrina Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay here is another honest question: Do you really honestly think not
having co-maintainers for base packages is ever a good idea? What if
someone is busy? You don't really feel safe noticing your base packages
aren't being co-maintain
Okay here is another honest
question: Do you really honestly think not having
co-maintainers for base packages is ever a good idea? What if
someone is busy? You don't really feel safe noticing your base
packages aren't being co-maintained since people are busy.
Also back to the innovation
On 7/28/06, Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Gustavo Franco [Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300]:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
And remember that (well done) NMUs are not only for bugs of RC severity.
For example, I'm going to upload to 7-delayed
* Gustavo Franco [Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300]:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
And remember that (well done) NMUs are not only for bugs of RC severity.
For example, I'm going to upload to 7-delayed a fix for #368917, sending
the patch to the BTS at the
On 7/28/06, Mario Iseli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi there,
(...)
I imagine if we would have a big CVS tree like Gentoo or some BSD's, i
wouldn't know where to begin with my work or what I sould do. The forest
is so large and you don't see the tree!
I don't think we need a central approach,
On 7/28/06, Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Pierre,
please don't Cc me, I read this list. :)
Il giorno ven, 28/07/2006 alle 19.28 +0200, Pierre Habouzit ha scritto:
> and that won't happen because I'm not very keen on leraning yet another
> VCS, and that other's think the same
On 7/28/06, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, and we could start by really enforcing co-maintainership. Make it 100%
> mandatory for all essential, required and base packages at first.
Are there packages which are particularly well co-maintained right now?
What about debian-insta
On 7/28/06, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
also sprach Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.28.1838 +0100]:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
> The developer needs to be logged and mark if all his packages (where
> he's listed as uploader) c
also sprach Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.28.1838 +0100]:
> * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official status.
> The developer needs to be logged and mark if all his packages (where
> he's listed as uploader) can be NMU'ed or not. He could add comments
> like "I'm li
On 7/28/06, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please reply to -project only!
also sprach Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.28.1737 +0100]:
> If Debian had slightly less of a culture of "Keep your hands off
> my package", I'd do it here instead.
I've been thinking about this
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.28.1737 +0100]:
> > If Debian had slightly less of a culture of "Keep your hands off
> > my package", I'd do it here instead.
>
> I've been thinking about this a lot for the past week.
>
> Is th
39 matches
Mail list logo
