Andrei POPESCU writes ("Re: ignoring bugs with no maintainer (Re: Removal of
emacs23 from unstable/testing)"):
> Last time someone (Bcc'd) tried to tackle these (admittedly without
> contacting the maintainer in advance) the contributor was prevented
> from doing so and
Rob Browning writes ("Re: ignoring bugs with no maintainer (Re: Removal of
emacs23 from unstable/testing)"):
> Don Armstrong writes:
> > The right solution for these (and other bugs which happen when source
> > packages are renamed) is for the bugs to follow the ne
Rob Browning writes:
> I agree (as far as emacsXY and guile-X.Y are concerned). Anyone should
> feel free to reassign them to emacs24 (or guile-2.0 respectively).
>
> Otherwise, I'll plan to do it.
And I hope it goes without saying, but I'm always happy to have help
dealing with the bugs -- eve
Don Armstrong writes:
> The right solution for these (and other bugs which happen when source
> packages are renamed) is for the bugs to follow the new source package
> name.
>
> Eventually this is the way it will work in the BTS, but doing so
> requires me to complete the postgresql migration wo
On Sat, 10 May 2014, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014, Rob Browning wrote:
> > If we can, I'd like to remove emacs23 from unstable/testing before the
> > freeze. To make that possible, any relevant packages will need to
> > migrate to emacs24, or just include support for emacs24.
>
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Having these bugs rott in a corner of the BTS almost nobody ever looks at is
> a
> disservice to our users. IMO there should be 0 bugs open against
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?maint=
If that's really desirable,
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 06:29:22PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-05-11 at 15:39 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> [...]
> > So, the natural thing to do would be to reassign them.
>
> I think the natural thing to do is to close with a message explaining
> how to reopen and reassign if the
On Sun, 2014-05-11 at 15:39 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > I believe all those bugs should be either reassigned to emacs23 (and soon
> > 24)
> > or just be closed with an informal message, also offering to reopen and
> > reassign
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I believe all those bugs should be either reassigned to emacs23 (and soon 24)
> or just be closed with an informal message, also offering to reopen and
> reassign to emacs23/24 if applicable. [...]
Closing them would be a disservic
On Sb, 10 mai 14, 18:56:24, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
> Having these bugs rott in a corner of the BTS almost nobody ever looks at is
> a
> disservice to our users. IMO there should be 0 bugs open against
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?maint=
To also bring some numbers to this:
$
Hi Rob,
On Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014, Rob Browning wrote:
> If we can, I'd like to remove emacs23 from unstable/testing before the
> freeze. To make that possible, any relevant packages will need to
> migrate to emacs24, or just include support for emacs24.
what's your plan for dealing with old bugs
If we can, I'd like to remove emacs23 from unstable/testing before the
freeze. To make that possible, any relevant packages will need to
migrate to emacs24, or just include support for emacs24.
In a while, assuming there are no showstopping objections, I'll see
about filing the relevant bugs for
12 matches
Mail list logo
