On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 12:03 +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> > than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
>
> Before you do that:
Yeah, I know there are packages that should not be closed, probably, and
they could just hide from the view and be closed. What I really trust is
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 07:50 +0200, Martin Samuelsson wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
> in X days than bugs that had their initial post in Y days?
>
> Some packages are trickier than others to create and may therefor take
> more time. As long as peo
Paul TBBle Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:34:51PM +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
>> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
>> debian: http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/ffmpeg.html?
>
> Only ffmpeg-dev is in Debian as ffmpeg upstream recom
Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi David!
>
> About ITP's, they should be retitled to RFPs, rather than closed. That
> way, other people can have a go at packaging the software.
>
I concur. If someone did not produce a packge withing NN days (say 3
months) after ITP, the system shoul
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 12:03 +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> > than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
>
> Before you do that:
Yeah, I know there are packages that should not be closed, probably, and
they could just hide from the view and be closed. What I really trust is
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 07:50 +0200, Martin Samuelsson wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
> in X days than bugs that had their initial post in Y days?
>
> Some packages are trickier than others to create and may therefor take
> more time. As long as peo
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:34:51PM +0200, Vedran Furac wrote:
> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
> debian: http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/ffmpeg.html?
Only ffmpeg-dev is in Debian as ffmpeg upstream recommends static linking
due to not having fixed the API/AB
Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christian Marillat wrote:
>> Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> Package already in Debian : gstreamer0.8-ffmpeg
>
> Ops, then it should be closed.
>
> Btw. why then mencoder, can't be packaged? Why are only ffmpeg -dev in
Normaly, encode
Christian Marillat wrote:
> Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>David Moreno Garza wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>>- note that there is software that probably can't be packaged:
>>
>>http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.c
Vedran Furac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Moreno Garza wrote:
>> On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
[...]
> - note that there is software that probably can't be packaged:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=203211
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bu
David Moreno Garza wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
>>>But my intention was not to read the whole list and do this by hand!
>>>This should be done by the same script which sends the sem automated
>>>mails to the BTS.
>>
>>As there is a consensus that it is a goo
Hi David!
You wrote:
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
> tomorrow noon-, by tomorrow night). I'll point to documentatio
David Moreno Garza @ 2005-09-13 (Tuesday), 18:06 (-0500)
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight
Wouldn't it make more sense to close bugs that hasn't recieved more info
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
> has diseappeared.
> Old ITPs should be turned into RFPs, not closed.
I don't agree. If there's no current interest in having the package
created, having the bug open actually
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
>>has diseappeared.
>
> The spectacular amount of clutter they provide -- rendering the wnpp bug list
> unreadable unless you ignore them all -- combined
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:47 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
> has diseappeared.
>
> Old ITPs should be turned into RFPs, not closed.
Well, actually the wnpp bugs are probably the dirtiest part on the BTS:
Understanding dirti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There is no good reason to close old RFPs unless the upstream source
>has diseappeared.
The spectacular amount of clutter they provide -- rendering the wnpp bug list
unreadable unless you ignore them all -- combined with their total
uselessness? Seems like a pair of go
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Talking with adn on IRC, I've decided to launch an script that will
> close every opened ITP and RFP bug on the BTS with a lifetime greater
> than 600 days by tonight (or if anything goes wrong -I have an exam
> tomorrow noon-, by tomorrow night).
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > But my intention was not to read the whole list and do this by hand!
> > This should be done by the same script which sends the sem automated
> > mails to the BTS.
>
> As there is a consensus that it is a good idea to close long-inactiv
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 20:36, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Maybe some usertags-hack?
>
> That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
> 'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
>
> [1] http://wi
Hi,
* Mohammed Adnène Trojette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 22:21]:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Maybe some usertags-hack?
>
> That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
> 'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
>
> [1] http
* Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 21:35]:
[ vote for RFPs ]
> > Currently everyone interested in such a package could send a "me too"
> > mail to the report...
> That isn't going to do much good if nobody ever reads them.
>
> For a "me too" thing to be useful, it needs to be immediatel
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 08:06:22PM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 19:11]:
> > > Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> > > which missing packages are most wanted?
> > Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag
> "Radu Spineanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At least something that has the ability to put ITPs,RFPs in separate
>> pages,
>
> You mean like http://www.us.debian.org/devel/wnpp/?
>
Yes, something like that. But change the information shown on each page
depending of the type of wnpp entry.
Fo
* David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 19:11]:
> > Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> > which missing packages are most wanted?
> Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
> work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Curre
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:36 +0200, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> [1] http://wiki.debian.org/WNPPBugsTagging
This is a great work, thanks.
Is there any plan to start using it and tagging?
Cheers,
--
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.damog.net/
<[EMAIL P
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Maybe some usertags-hack?
That is exactly what we are working on, with Clément Stenac and Marc
'HE' Brockschmidt. Here[1] is a list of tags we intend to use.
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/WNPPBugsTagging
Please no Cc:, I read the list.
--
Mohammed Adn
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 19:06 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> > Maybe it would a good idea to create a new web interface for the wnpp bugs.
> > At least something that has the ability to put ITPs,RFPs in separate
> > pages,
>
> You mean like http://www.us.debian.org/devel/wnpp/?
But the prop
Re: David Moreno Garza in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
> work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Maybe some usertags-hack? But then, the people who know how that works
could as well package the RFP themselves...
Christoph
--
[
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:05 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Perhaps we should have some voting mechanism, to let users tell us
> which missing packages are most wanted?
Probably something like a rfp-request-seconded tag on the bug could
work. Although rfp-request is somehow redundant.
Cheers,
"Radu Spineanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
>> suggest software to be packaged?
>>
>> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of some
>> 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I have
Alexander Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
> * Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 02:46]:
> [ long RFPs ]
>> Or don't even open RFP bugs in the first place because they're
>> thoroughly useless?
>
> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
> suggest s
> Hi!
>
> Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
> suggest software to be packaged?
>
> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of some
> 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I have some
> time - it's just that it's difficu
[Alexander Schmehl]
> I don't think RFPs per se are useless - actually I have a list of
> some 20 RFPs I would like to take a deeper look to, as soon as I
> have some time - it's just that it's difficult to look at so many
> wnpps.
I agree. There are packages I would like to assist into the archi
Hi!
* Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 02:46]:
[ long RFPs ]
> Or don't even open RFP bugs in the first place because they're
> thoroughly useless?
Do you have a proposal for a better way on how our users can request /
suggest software to be packaged?
I don't think RFPs per se are useles
Scripsit Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 10:37]:
>> There was a discussion about closing old RFPs on -project in the middle
>> of July (around the 13th, I think). I really should get acting on the
>> consensus of that thread and close the old RFPs.
Hi,
* Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 10:37]:
> ti, 2005-09-13 kello 01:45 +0200, Alexander Schmehl kirjoitti:
> > Close RFP after ... uhm... let's say 1 year inactivity and send the
> > submitter an apology, that we couldn't find a volunteer for the
> > requested package, should to
Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
>> Hi,
>> If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
>> open bugs which are very very old.
>> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
>> automatically after the t
ti, 2005-09-13 kello 01:45 +0200, Alexander Schmehl kirjoitti:
> Close RFP after ... uhm... let's say 1 year inactivity and send the
> submitter an apology, that we couldn't find a volunteer for the
> requested package, should to very well.
There was a discussion about closing old RFPs on -project
* Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050913 00:47]:
> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> automatically after the third semi automatic notice mail
> which is sent to the BTS entry?
What is the purpose of this mail? Either there is someone interested in
packaging it, or you won't
Hi,
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-13 01:07]:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Hi,
> > If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
> > open bugs which are very very old.
> > Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> > aut
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:47:33AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
> If you go through the list of wnpp bugs you will see alot of
> open bugs which are very very old.
> Especially the RFPs. What about closing an RFP bug
> automatically after the third semi automatic notice mail
> which is sent to
42 matches
Mail list logo
