On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 06:48:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>...
> One approach as Holger points out: look for
> packages where all the recent uploads have been by the MIA member, which
> doesn't require the Uploaders field at all.
As I already tried to explain, this is an easy part that could b
Hi,
as a more radical change one could also ask the question where to
maintain the maintainer information. Currently we handle this in the
source package via the Maintainer and Uploaders field, and via team
memberships.
This has several limitations: for teams, Uploaders will often be
useless (yo
On 03.08.2017 21:08, ba...@debian.org wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2017, at 17:57, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> While at DebCamp, Stefano Rivera and I sat down to analyze what needs to be
>> done
>> to deprecate Python2 usage within the distribution. It might not be
>> possible to
>> drop Python2 for the
On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 at 12:10:03 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> So I have been wondering several times whether we should move the
> maintainer information elsewhere. For example, tracker.d.o could be
> extended to record maintainer information. It could also understand
> the concept of "teams" l
On August 4, 2017 6:49:23 AM EDT, Matthias Klose wrote:
>On 03.08.2017 21:08, ba...@debian.org wrote:
>> On Aug 3, 2017, at 17:57, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>
>>> While at DebCamp, Stefano Rivera and I sat down to analyze what
>needs to be done
>>> to deprecate Python2 usage within the distributi
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 6:10 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> So I have been wondering several times whether we should move the
> maintainer information elsewhere. For example, tracker.d.o could be
> extended to record maintainer information. It could also understand
> the concept of "teams" listing
On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 06:47:33 +0200, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> * Package name: rss-bridge
> Version : 2017-08-03
> Upstream Author : sebsauvage
> Mitsukarenai
> Pierre Mazière
> logmanoriginal
> * URL : htt
I'm getting the following lintian error message:
E: e2fsprogs changes: orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature
e2fsprogs_1.43.5.orig.tar.gz
N:
N:The packaging includes an upstream signing key but the corresponding
N:.asc signature for one or more source tarballs are not included in your
N
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 09:27:14AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I'm getting the following lintian error message:
>
> E: e2fsprogs changes: orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature
> e2fsprogs_1.43.5.orig.tar.gz
> N:
> N:The packaging includes an upstream signing key but the corresponding
> N:
> I think there should be one release which is not shipping
> /usr/bin/python before /usr/bin/python should be reused and pointed
> at python (>> 2). This should be good enough to get all scripts
> actively converted which are not part of the distribution.
>
> If that release is buster, we should r
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ondrej Koblizek
* Package name: python-deprecation
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : Brian Curtin
* URL : https://github.com/briancurtin/deprecation
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Python
Description : A
Hi Theodore,
> E: e2fsprogs changes: orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature
> e2fsprogs_1.43.5.orig.tar.gz
Whoops, I think that's too high a severity. Filed as #870722 and pending
release.
> […]
See also:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/07/msg00451.html
Regards,
--
,''
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 04:19:21AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Your definition is completely detached from the reality in Debian.
>
> Many (likely the majority) of teams in Debian have not more
> than 1 active member.
citation needed.
I seriously doubt this is true. There are some of these team
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ghislain Antony Vaillant
* Package name: libjs-fetch
Version : 2.0.3
Upstream Author : GitHub, Inc.
* URL : https://github.com/github/fetch
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Javascript
Description : window.fetch
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 09:27:14AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I'm getting the following lintian error message:
>
> E: e2fsprogs changes: orig-tarball-missing-upstream-signature
> e2fsprogs_1.43.5.orig.tar.gz
>
> ... but I can't figure out how to get the changes file to include the
> original
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 06:48:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adrian Bunk writes:
> > Your definition is completely detached from the reality in Debian.
>
> > Many (likely the majority) of teams in Debian have not more than 1
> > active member.
>From my teamstatistics point of view[1] I c
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ananthan Unni A
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-worker-farm
Version : 1.4.1
Upstream Author : FIX_ME upstream author
* URL : https://github.com/rvagg/node-worker-farm
* License : Expat
P
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:37:53PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> As an example, we do have teams that define in their policy the
> semantics for "person in Maintainer, team in Uploaders".
That should be changed. Its a perfect way to exclude "Uploaders" from
beeing informed about issues with a pa
On വെള്ളി 04 ആഗസ്റ്റ് 2017 08:47 വൈകു, ANANTHANUNNI A wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Ananthan Unni A
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> * Package name: node-worker-farm
> Version : 1.4.1
> Upstream Author : FIX_ME upstream author
> * URL
Hi Holger,
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:33:03PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Your definition is completely detached from the reality in Debian.
> >
> > Many (likely the majority) of teams in Debian have not more
> > than 1 active member.
>
> citation needed.
>
> I seriously doubt this is true
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 10:28:54AM -0400, Chris Lamb wrote:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/07/msg00451.html
Thanks! Turns out the problem was operator error. I dropped
e2fsprogs_1.43.4.orig.tar.gz.asc
into the top-level directory, instead of
e2fsprogs_1.43.5.orig.tar.gz.asc
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 11:09:06PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
>
> I agree. This information is useless, and even if it's not, the source
> package is entirely the wrong place for it. Let's get rid of the
> Uploaders field entirely.
I fail to see what problem is solved by droping the Uploade
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 01:58:15AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Finding unmaintained packages is the hard part.
True.
> In a bigger team maintaining 500 packages it is a non-trivial amount of
> extra work searching for packages no-one inside the team is actively
> taking care of.
My way t
Hi Theodore,
> It might be nice though if the Lintian informational messages had more
> explanation about how to address this. For example, telling the
> developer to rerun dpkg-buildpackage with *.orig.tar.*.asc alongside
> the original compressed tarfile, perhaps?
Done:
https://anonscm.deb
Hi,
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> as a more radical change one could also ask the question where to
> maintain the maintainer information. Currently we handle this in the
> source package via the Maintainer and Uploaders field, and via team
> memberships.
>
> This has several limitations: for teams,
Hi!
tl;dr: I hereby propose we enable AppArmor by default in testing/sid,
and decide one year later if we want to keep it this way in the
Buster release.
My goals when initiating this discussion are:
- Get a rough idea of what amount of effort the Debian project is
happy (and able) to invest
Hello,
On Fri, Aug 04 2017, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Autogenerating Uploaders like GNOME does [1] would be an alternative
> approach.
>
> [1]
> https://sources.debian.net/src/gnome-pkg-tools/0.19.9/1/rules/uploaders.mk/
I don't understand this suggestion. If it can be automatically
generated, just
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:04:27PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> But it's not clear if the HPC community wants to run
> containers/namespaces at all.
Exploring the container-less approaches for different but related
purposes[1], I just did what turned out to be a practice test of
installation loc
Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Reintroducing /usr/bin/python as a python3 version risks their systems
> for no benefit (since all python3 stuff points to /usr/bin/python3 and
> works fine). Just let it go and don't bring it back.
Agreed completely. /usr/bin/python -> python3 in Arch is an endless
foun
intrigeri:
Hi,
Overall, this sounds like an interesting proposal and personally, I
agree that I think the Debian Linux ports would be better off with an
LSM enabled by default.
> What's the cost for Debian users?
> -
>
> AppArmor unavoidably breaks functionality
30 matches
Mail list logo
