uploaded but not processed

Hello, my two last upload were successfully uploaded (yesterday and the day before), but they have not yet been precessed. The involved packages are: 4ti2 and mpfrcxx. I suspect a keying issue. Is there a log where I can get more info ? Thanks in advance, Jerome -- Jerome BENOIT | calculus+at-

Re: uploaded but not processed

On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 14:52 +0400, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello, > > my two last upload were successfully uploaded (yesterday and the day > before), > but they have not yet been precessed. The involved packages are: 4ti2 > and mpfrcxx. > I suspect a keying issue. Is there a log where I can get mor

Re: uploaded but not processed

Thanks for your prompt reply. On 06/05/18 15:24, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 14:52 +0400, Jerome BENOIT wrote: >> Hello, >> >> my two last upload were successfully uploaded (yesterday and the day >> before), >> but they have not yet been precessed. The involved packages are: 4ti

Re: uploaded but not processed

To expand on what this means: On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 12:24:53PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > You can log in to mirror.ftp-master.debian.org (currently coccia.d.o) > and check /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/log/current , which will indeed > reveal the issue you suspect: > > 20180506110423|process-

Bug#898059: ITP: r-cran-rappdirs -- GNU R application directories

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-cran-rappdirs Version : 0.3.1 Upstream Author : Hadley Wickham * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=rappdirs * License : MIT Programming Lang: GNU R Description : GNU R appli

Bug#898061: ITP: r-cran-base64url -- GNU R fast and URL-safe Base64 encoder and decoder

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-cran-base64url Version : 1.3 Upstream Author : Michel Lang * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=base64url * License : GPL Programming Lang: GNU R Description : GNU R fast and

Re: uploaded but not processed

Hi, On 06/05/18 17:12, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > To expand on what this means: > > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 12:24:53PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> You can log in to mirror.ftp-master.debian.org (currently coccia.d.o) >> and check /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/log/current , which will indeed >> rev

Re: uploaded but not processed

On Sun, 6 May 2018, 5:00 p.m. Jerome BENOIT, wrote: > Hi, > > On 06/05/18 17:12, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > The upload will stay in the queue forever until either the key becomes > > trusted again and so it can be processed (e.g. you push an update the > > What do you mean by `you push an update'

Re: [1/2] MBF: Defunct alioth addresses in the Maintainer: field (serious)

On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 05:34:10PM +0200, Christoph Biedl wrote: > A lot of now defunct alioth addresses are used in the Maintainer: > field. This makes the packages rc-buggy for an invalid address. > > To create awareness about that issue, also to provide suggestions on > how to resolve this I in

Bug#898063: ITP: r-cran-batchtools -- GNU R tools for computation on batch systems

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-cran-batchtools Version : 0.9.8 Upstream Author : Michel Lang * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=batchtools * License : LGPL Programming Lang: GNU R Description : GNU R too

Bug#898071: ITP: foundationdb -- distributed, transactional, key-value store

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Nicolas Braud-Santoni * Package name: foundationdb Version : 5.1.7 Upstream Author : Apple Inc. * URL : https://www.foundationdb.org/ * License : Apache-2.0 Programming Lang: C/C++ with bindings for many others Descri

Re: Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions

Hi Ian, On 04-05-18 13:08, Ian Jackson wrote: > Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions"): >> I hadn't realissed that _test_ dependencies would trigger retests, as >> well as actual package dependencies. > > Having read Mattia's message, and looking at the Testsuite-T

RFR: email about regressions [was: Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions]

Hi all, On 06-05-18 07:27, Paul Gevers wrote: >> But, anyway, thanks for your effort, but it obviously doesn't scale to >> have the central infrastructure team triage things. How easy would it >> be to have the CI automatically send an email to the maintainers of >> the rdependency and the depend

Re: uploaded but not processed

On 15029 March 1977, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > The upload will stay in the queue forever until either the key becomes > trusted again and so it can be processed (e.g. you push an update the > the keyring maintainers push it to the live keyring) or an ftp-master > manually moves it out of the way. Mo

Re: RFR: email about regressions [was: Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions]

Hi Paul, > Please find a proposed text for such an e-mail below. Comments or > improvements very welcome. Just some brief and somewhat-pedantic suggestions for improvements below. Beyond that, I'd love to see some parsable X-Foo: headers. I find these very helpful in the BTS's mails to reliably f

Bug#898095: ITP: node-syslog-client -- pure JavaScript implementation of Syslog protocol

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Xavier Guimard * Package name: node-syslog-client Version : 1.1.1 Upstream Author : Paul Grove * URL : https://github.com/paulgrove/node-syslog-client * License : Expat Programming Lang: JavaScript Description :