On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 07:01:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'd like to go ahead with a "Severity: wishlist" mass bug filing to
> kindly ask maintainers to add the missing header. The proposed mail
> template for mass-bug is attached.
This is now done, status page is at:
http://bugs
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Unblocks and Freeze Policy
> --
> ...
> We're also reducing the acceptance criteria [RM:POLICY] - we're now only going
> to accept:
> ...
Which policy applies in the case of unblock requests that are pending
action by
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:09:51PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Neil McGovern wrote:
>
> > Unblocks and Freeze Policy
> > --
> > ...
> > We're also reducing the acceptance criteria [RM:POLICY] - we're now only
> > going
> > to accept:
> > ...
>
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Neil McGovern wrote:
> The policy and diff from the start can be found at
> http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html
Which policy applies to #685913 (and all the other open unblocks)? The
policy announced at the beginning of the freeze or the current pol
Hi,
Ansgar has recently made an MBF against all packages including the
problematic JSON license term "The Software shall be used for Good, not
Evil". From what I've seen, most - if not all - of the affected packages
are using in-source libraries copyright JSON.org, which AFAIK means
convincing a s
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:25:51PM +0100, Leo 'costela' Antunes wrote:
> Should we maybe try again? As Ansgar
> mentioned in one bugreport, the license is considered non-free not only
> by us, but by Fedora as well[1] (and it's also notOSI-recognized)
FWIW, by FSF too: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:25:51PM +0100, Leo 'costela' Antunes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ansgar has recently made an MBF against all packages including the
> problematic JSON license term "The Software shall be used for Good, not
> Evil". From what I've seen, most - if not all - of the affected packages
>
* Leo 'costela' Antunes , 2012-11-08, 16:25:
Ansgar has recently made an MBF against all packages including the
problematic JSON license term "The Software shall be used for Good, not
Evil". From what I've seen, most - if not all - of the affected
packages are using in-source libraries copyrigh
On Thu, 08 Nov 2012, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 06/11/12 17:05, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Still, it did lead me to a possible cause: I am not trying to modprobe
> > "microcode" in the intel-microcode postinst. This can indeed cause the
> > failure to update microcode at p
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 10:40:18PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Which policy applies to #685913 (and all the other open unblocks)? The
> policy announced at the beginning of the freeze or the current policy?
…or the time the unblock was filed?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists
On 06.11.2012 23:24, Moray Allan wrote:
There will be some Debian packaging and bug-squashing tutorials, and
ideally some actual bug-squashing, this coming weekend in Banja Luka.
Dates: 2012-12-10 and 2012-12-11 (starting 11 a.m. local time)
These dates look like December 10/11 and not Novembe
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Martin Steghöfer"
* Package name: throttle
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : James Klicman
* URL : http://klicman.org/throttle/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : bandwidth limiting pipe
throttle
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libtins
Version : 0.2
Upstream author : Matías Fontanini
* URL : http://libtins.sourceforge.net/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
Description : C++ library for manipulating raw network packets
This
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 05:18:55PM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 10:40:18PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Which policy applies to #685913 (and all the other open unblocks)? The
> > policy announced at the beginning of the freeze or the current policy?
>
> …or the time the unblo
Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2012, 19:21 + schrieb Neil McGovern:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 05:18:55PM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 10:40:18PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > Which policy applies to #685913 (and all the other open unblocks)? The
> > > policy announced at the
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> As far as I can see Mr Crockford _enjoys_ being asked to change his
> license. So no, please don't feed the troll.
As much as I think this licence is stupid (from my free software point of
view), I don't think he should be called a troll,
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > And an annoying technical detail makes it suboptimal to add the
microcode
> > packages as a recommendation of the firmware-linux-nonfree package.
> ...which is that dpkg does not support architecture-specific relations
> in binary pack
I would like to have a nocompress Debian build option that will skip
any compression/optimisation at build time.
Specifically dpkg-builddeb and dpkg-source should use not use any
compression methods.
Similarly other tools can optionally listen on that variable e.g.
skipping pkgmangler and dh_scou
On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Hm, I filed two unblock requests after that deadline, but before reading
> the announce mail about it.
get a lawyer, quick!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 19:13, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > As far as I can see Mr Crockford _enjoys_ being asked to change his
> > license. So no, please don't feed the troll.
> As much as I think this licence is stupid (from my free software point of
> On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > And an annoying technical detail makes it suboptimal to add the microcode
> > > packages as a recommendation of the firmware-linux-nonfree package.
> > ...which is that dpkg does not support architecture-specific relations
> > in binary
Hi!
Peter Samuelson writes:
> ...But it does bring up the question of why intel-microcode and
> amd64-microcode are not built on kFreeBSD or the Hurd. Maybe those
> kernels lack a CPU microcode interface?
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/faq/compatibility-processors.html
Though I rather doubt the li
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Florian Schlichting
* Package name: libunix-configfile-perl
Version : 0.06
Upstream Author : Steve Snodgrass
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Unix-ConfigFile/
* License : GPL-1+, Artistic
Programming Lang: Perl
De
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:13:45PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > As far as I can see Mr Crockford _enjoys_ being asked to change his
> > license. So no, please don't feed the troll.
>
> As much as I think this licence is stupid (from my free s
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:29:02PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Hm, I filed two unblock requests after that deadline, but before reading
> the announce mail about it.
You don't state whether the decision impacts them or not, but so it goes…
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lis
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:21:30PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Apologies for the lack of clarity in the d-d-a posting - the new
> acceptance criteria are for unblocks filed after 11:54:49 + today.
No problem - thanks for the clarification!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@
On Thu, 08 Nov 2012, Christoph Egger wrote:
> Peter Samuelson writes:
> > ...But it does bring up the question of why intel-microcode and
> > amd64-microcode are not built on kFreeBSD or the Hurd. Maybe those
> > kernels lack a CPU microcode interface?
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/faq/compatib
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dominic Hargreaves
* Package name: hybserv
Version : 1.9.2
Upstream Author : Patrick Alken and Dinko Korunic
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/hybserv2/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : IRC
Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2012, 20:35 + schrieb Jon Dowland:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:29:02PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > Hm, I filed two unblock requests after that deadline, but before reading
> > the announce mail about it.
>
> You don't state whether the decision impacts them or no
Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
> I would like to have a nocompress Debian build option that will skip any
> compression/optimisation at build time.
> Specifically dpkg-builddeb and dpkg-source should use not use any
> compression methods.
Why do you think this would be of any benefit? gzip compressi
On 8 November 2012 23:39, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
>
>> I would like to have a nocompress Debian build option that will skip any
>> compression/optimisation at build time.
>
>> Specifically dpkg-builddeb and dpkg-source should use not use any
>> compression methods.
>
> Why
Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
> Gzip is ok, but many packages these days use xz -9 --extreme deb options
> which is not fast at all on my pandaboard nor on my cloud instances with
> capped CPU & memory. Using such compression is good for release debs,
> but not in developer testing. It wastes develop
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 486 (new: 0)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 138 (new: 3)
Total number of packages request
On 9 November 2012 00:33, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
>
>> Gzip is ok, but many packages these days use xz -9 --extreme deb options
>> which is not fast at all on my pandaboard nor on my cloud instances with
>> capped CPU & memory. Using such compression is good for release de
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:39:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
>
> > I would like to have a nocompress Debian build option that will skip any
> > compression/optimisation at build time.
>
> > Specifically dpkg-builddeb and dpkg-source should use not use any
> > compress
On 9 November 2012 00:54, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:39:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
>>
>> > I would like to have a nocompress Debian build option that will skip any
>> > compression/optimisation at build time.
>>
>> > Specifically dpkg-buildd
Quoting Benjamin Drung (bdr...@debian.org):
> Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2012, 20:35 + schrieb Jon Dowland:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:29:02PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > > Hm, I filed two unblock requests after that deadline, but before reading
> > > the announce mail about it.
> >
> >
37 matches
Mail list logo
