Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Stéphane Glondu
* Package name: ocaml-mmap
Version : 1.1.0
Upstream Author : Jérémie Dimino and Anton Bachin
* URL : https://github.com/mirage/mmap
* License : LGPL 2.1 with linking exception
Programming Lang: OCaml
D
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joseph Nahmias
* Package name: octave-kernel
Version : 0.31.1
Upstream Author : Steven Silvester
* URL : https://github.com/calysto/octave_kernel
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Jupyter ker
Andrej Shadura writes ("Re: Consensus Call: Git Packaging Round 1"):
> I noticed some people [citation needed] think it is not important to
> preserve pristine upstream tarballs with the move to Git, and it's
> okay to regenerate them from a Git branch without trying to preserve
> checksums of the
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:40:22AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrej Shadura writes ("Re: Consensus Call: Git Packaging Round 1"):
> > I noticed some people [citation needed] think it is not important to
> > preserve pristine upstream tarballs with the move to Git, and it's
> > okay to regenerate
On 2019-08-26 23:41, Sam Hartman wrote:
I don't think you're part of our consensus.
Yes, that might be very true. But what you describe by
"our consensus"
is the opinion of a few people who actually read this mailinglist
regularily and consider to reply. I really hope that you do not
consider t
Ian Jackson writes ("tag2upload service architecture and risk assessment -
draft v2"):
> Thanks for all the comments on the draft service architecture I posted
> in late July. [1] I have made a v2, incorporating the various helpful
> suggestions, and the information from the thread.
It has been
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:32:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thanks for all the comments on the draft service architecture I posted
> in late July. [1] I have made a v2, incorporating the various helpful
> suggestions, and the information from the thread.
No, you just did a medium break. Mail
> "Bernd" == Bernd Zeimetz writes:
Bernd> On 2019-08-26 23:41, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I don't think you're part of our consensus.
Bernd> Yes, that might be very true. But what you describe by "our
Bernd> consensus" is the opinion of a few people who actually read
Bernd> th
> "Luke" == Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes:
>On Friday, August 23, 2019, Karsten Merker wrote:
> and decide for themselves who is displaying "violent
> hatred" on mailing lists and come to their own judgement about
> your allegations:
Luke>You've now violated the Debi
On 2019-08-27 09:48 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> Also, one of the assumptions about consensus discussions is that many
> more people are reading than contributing. But if those people disagree
> strongly enough they'll speak up.
Exactly - I'm one of these people. I'm happy with what Sam said a
> "Bastian" == Bastian Blank writes:
Bastian> Please describe the design changes you added to address our
Bastian> concerns. The risk assessment still lists things we
Bastian> described as no-go.
Bastian> Sorry, but I don't see how we can go forward, while you
Bastian>
Dear Bastian,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 02:41:28PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> No, you just did a medium break. Mail is not web, don't do that. You
> need to at least list the differences.
[...]
> Sorry, but I don't see how we can go forward, while you seem to be
> either unable to understand w
Bernd Zeimetz :
> On 2019-08-26 23:41, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I don't think you're part of our consensus.
>
> Yes, that might be very true. But what you describe by
> "our consensus"
I'm not a fan of this phrasing by Sam. But he makes a very good
point: you have not answered any of the substanti
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Drew Parsons
* Package name: python-dmsh
Version : 0.1.3
Upstream Author : Nico Schlömer
* URL : https://github.com/nschloe/dmsh
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description : simple mesh generator inspir
On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:08:59 +0100
Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think Sam's proposed change would be to document in the DR that a
> maintainer should handle change requests (including code
> contributions) sent to the BTS. That would surely just be documenting
> our existing norm. It seems to me that
On 2019-08-27 17:52:02 +0200 (+0200), Alf Gaida wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:08:59 +0100 Ian Jackson wrote:
[...]
> > Please avoid pejorative language like "stone age".
>
> Nicer would be "lowest common nominator" but "stone age" describe
> the process of sending patches via BTS very well. Upps
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: tag2upload service architecture and risk assessment -
draft v2"):
> I do think it would be valuable to confirm whether we're at an impasse.
> It sounds like Ian may think that resolving your concerns would be a
> no-go
I'm definitely trying to have a constructive discussi
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 05:52:02PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:08:59 +0100
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Please avoid pejorative language like "stone age".
>
> Nicer would be "lowest common nominator" but "stone age" describe the
> process of sending patches via BTS very well. Upp
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: tag2upload service architecture and risk assessment -
draft v2"):
> [stuff]
Argh. A bunch of people helped me refine this but I sent an early
draft by mistake. I guess it's too late to hope people will read only
the better version, but here it is anyway.
If you haven't
Am Dienstag, den 27.08.2019, 19:18 +0200 schrieb Adam Borowski:
> New stuff is always better. Go Electron!
>
Like it or not - the idea of pull requests (Github) or merge requests (Gitlab)
isn't exactly new. It might surprise you that people outside of debian are used
to use it a lot. Anyways, it'
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> From my reading of the thread, it seems that there are two
Ian> disputed design demands, which are related.
Ian> The most basic demand is that the archive should be able to
Ian> verify the whole contents of the .dsc, given data signed by th
> "Alf" == Alf Gaida writes:
Alf> There are things i really like about PRs or MRs - they can be
Alf> reviewed, commented, changed without problems and fast.
And as Sean pointed out, it's hard to understand the history of the
changes and comments after they hppened. What happens whe
On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:52:01 -0400
Sam Hartman wrote:
> And as Sean pointed out, it's hard to understand the history of the
> changes and comments after they hppened. What happens when I'm trying
> to review a MR three years later and the MR was rebased 4 times during
> the lifetime of the MR pr
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 02:52:01PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Alf" == Alf Gaida writes:
>
>
> Alf> There are things i really like about PRs or MRs - they can be
> Alf> reviewed, commented, changed without problems and fast.
>
> And as Sean pointed out, it's hard to understand th
On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:35:37 -0400
Milan Kupcevic wrote:
> I fully agree with the initial best practices proposal stating that
> merge requests in salsa have to be attended to or otherwise this
> feature has to be disabled as per package maintainer preference.
I only stated that the Debian BTS f
On 8/27/19 1:37 PM, Alf Gaida wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 27.08.2019, 19:18 +0200 schrieb Adam Borowski:
>> New stuff is always better. Go Electron!
>>
> Like it or not - the idea of pull requests (Github) or merge requests (Gitlab)
> isn't exactly new. It might surprise you that people outside of d
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 1:19:14 PM EDT Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: tag2upload service architecture and risk assessment
- draft v2"):
> > [stuff]
>
> Argh. A bunch of people helped me refine this but I sent an early
> draft by mistake. I guess it's too late to hope people w
Scott Kitterman writes:
> As an example, I recall concerns about there not being an uploader
> signature on the source anymore, so we would lose the ability to verify
> from the archive who was responsible for the upload.
Does anyone do this? Does it work today?
I'm dubious that you would be a
On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 8:04:06 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > As an example, I recall concerns about there not being an uploader
> > signature on the source anymore, so we would lose the ability to verify
> > from the archive who was responsible for the upload.
>
>
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 05:04:06PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
>
> > As an example, I recall concerns about there not being an uploader
> > signature on the source anymore, so we would lose the ability to verify
> > from the archive who was responsible for the upload.
>
30 matches
Mail list logo
