On 10597 March 1977, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Well, I won't try to convince you to prioritize the new binary packages
from known source package because last I heard (some 360 days ago), you
didn't need convincing. Assuming that those 40-some packages affected
are easier to process, it'd still
Russ == Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ I'm dubious that's really the main reason for the NEW queue.
Russ Looking at http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html,
Russ the ftpmasters check a lot more than that. In addition,
Russ they also verify licensing issues. I
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ == Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ I'm dubious that's really the main reason for the NEW queue.
Russ Looking at http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html,
Russ the ftpmasters check a lot more than that. In addition,
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/
Well, I won't try to convince you to prioritize the new binary packages
from known source package because last I heard (some 360 days ago), you
didn't need convincing. Assuming that those 40-some packages affected
are easier to process, it'd still
On 2006-03-13, Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nobody mailed ftpmaster@ about the size of the NEW queue. -devel isn't
a contact address for ftp-master, at least speaking for myself,
mailinglists have a much lower priority than things like ftpmaster mail,
and when backlogged
Simon == Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon The main reason for the NEW queue is the US export
Simon legislation. If it were legal to make packages immediately
Simon downloadable, it would be done.
In which case why do new packages with known source code end up in the
NEW
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon == Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon The main reason for the NEW queue is the US export
Simon legislation. If it were legal to make packages immediately
Simon downloadable, it would be done.
In which case why do new packages
Hi,
Kevin Mark wrote:
If someone differentiated
it into a simple triaged state: unseen, seem and expect to process soon
and seen and requires more processing, it may alleviate some anxiety --
or maybe not.
Hm, I am wondering how the internal communication between the ftpmasters
works (i.e.
On 13-Mar-06, 17:11 (CST), Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brr, there was no such decision, so no need to inform anything anywhere.
It was more a try to not grow that fast for now, and try to remove
stuff when you add new things. That was after the archive growing
superfast in a very
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 14:59 +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar kirjoitti:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 12:20:38PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Is there a reason why the question should be made in private?
It seems as if only problems and annoyances end up on mailinglists, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Simon,
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 02:48:18PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
Kevin Mark wrote:
If someone differentiated
it into a simple triaged state: unseen, seem and expect to process soon
and seen and requires more processing, it may
* Petter Reinholdtsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060313 08:03]:
[Steinar H. Gunderson]
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else.
I guess that one
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Andreas Barth wrote:
Well, that person is currently on the CeBIT and manning the Debian booth
there.
The problem in the sentence above is the singular in that. I know that
Jörg Jaspers does a great job as ftp master assistant but didn't we
talked about the hit by a bus
On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Mon, March 13, 2006 01:39, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 06:53:08PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a
month ago.
Perhaps the ftpmasters
On 3/13/06, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.13.0752 +0100]:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done
by one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone
else.
The mirror split is a
also sprach Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.13.1101 +0100]:
Has that not been announced in any public place?
Not that I know. I got this information in the hallway track
during FOSDEM.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft
[Martin F Krafft]
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
complete.
Ouch. If that is true, I hope ftpmasters will announce it to the
developers, as a blocked NEW hinders development of Debian and should
also sprach Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.13.0752 +0100]:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done
by one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone
else.
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst kirjoitti:
I don't think it's useful to second-guess what they're doing, so my
question to Nathanael: when did you post this question to them directly
and what was their answer?
Is there a reason why the question should be made in private?
I
hi,
* Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 11:11]:
* Petter Reinholdtsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060313 08:03]:
[Steinar H. Gunderson]
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants
Le Lun 13 Mars 2006 10:38, martin f krafft a écrit :
also sprach Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.13.0752
+0100]:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done
by one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone
else.
The mirror split is a
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.13.0752 +0100]:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done
by one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone
else.
The mirror split is a complicated
#include hallo.h
* Petter Reinholdtsen [Mon, Mar 13 2006, 11:00:47AM]:
Ouch. If that is true, I hope ftpmasters will announce it to the
developers, as a blocked NEW hinders development of Debian and should
not we a surprise. An announcement would at least give us some idea
on when the NEW
On Mon, March 13, 2006 11:20, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst kirjoitti:
I don't think it's useful to second-guess what they're doing, so my
question to Nathanael: when did you post this question to them directly
and what was their answer?
Is there a
* Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 11:22]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
complete.
and of course such a useless information has been kept silent.
Maybe because it's simply not
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
and of course such a useless information has been kept silent.
Maybe because it's simply not true?
Sow what? If this is not true, what is true and why is it kept
silent (well, IRC logs are not really but effectively silent).
I know, Martin, it
Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 11:22]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
complete.
and of course such a useless information has been
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:39:04AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 06:53:08PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month
ago.
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
Different people
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 02:49:18PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 11:22]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
20:38 Ganneff the archive grow too fast too big. so i should not process
NEW so fast to not grow much more in a short term. something like that more.
Well, if that's the reason, are updates to existing source packages
still allowed? I'd really like to fix my RC bugs
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 14:59 +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar kirjoitti:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 12:20:38PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Is there a reason why the question should be made in private?
It seems as if only problems and annoyances end up on mailinglists, and
*not* to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 03:23:29PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
20:38 Ganneff the archive grow too fast too big. so i should not process
NEW so fast to not grow much more in a short term. something like that
more.
Well, if that's the reason, are updates to
Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 02:49:18PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 11:22]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Well, if that's the reason, are updates to existing source packages
still allowed? I'd really like to fix my RC bugs and sync with upstream
at the same time but the latter would involve so-version changes.
This is not the reason for any backlog, although it does
On 3/13/06, Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst kirjoitti:
I don't think it's useful to second-guess what they're doing, so my
question to Nathanael: when did you post this question to them directly
and what was their answer?
Is there
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 02:39:11PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 3/13/06, Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst kirjoitti:
I don't think it's useful to second-guess what they're doing, so my
question to Nathanael: when did you post
On 3/13/06, Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 03:23:29PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
20:38 Ganneff the archive grow too fast too big. so i should not
process
NEW so fast to not grow much more in a short term. something
On 3/13/06, Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 02:39:11PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 3/13/06, Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ma, 2006-03-13 kello 08:57 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst kirjoitti:
I don't think it's useful to second-guess what they're
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month ago.
Although that doesn't explain the packages listed up top.
DWN permanently lists new packages, have this always been false positives?
Regards,
Joey
--
The only stupid question is the
On 3/12/06, Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 06:53:08PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month
ago.
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
I asked Joerg Jaspert about this
Nico Golde wrote:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else.
I guess that one person got busy or demotivated. I suspect NEW
Well, that person is currently on the CeBIT and manning the
Nico Golde wrote:
Hi,
* Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 19:19]:
Nico Golde wrote:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else.
I guess that one person got busy or
Hi,
* Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-13 19:19]:
Nico Golde wrote:
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else.
I guess that one person got busy or demotivated. I suspect NEW
On 10592 March 1977, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month ago.
Now thats just wrong.
I have a backlog, yup, but that will clear itself again in a short
timeframe.
--
bye Joerg
[Talking about Social Contract]:
We will not
On 10592 March 1977, Gustavo Franco wrote:
If the ftpmasters are going to stop NEW processing for a while with or
without a special criteria, they should inform us through d-d-a or the
DPL if they think it will generate too much noise, like these threads.
If they did that i'm yet to hear
On 3/13/06, Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10592 March 1977, Gustavo Franco wrote:
If the ftpmasters are going to stop NEW processing for a while with or
without a special criteria, they should inform us through d-d-a or the
DPL if they think it will generate too much noise,
On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 11:00 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Ouch. If that is true, I hope ftpmasters will announce it to the
developers, as a blocked NEW hinders development of Debian and should
not we a surprise. An announcement would at least give us some idea
on when the NEW holding
Petter Reinholdtsen dijo [Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:00:47AM +0100]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
complete.
Ouch. If that is true, I hope ftpmasters will announce it to the
developers, as a
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:49:39PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen dijo [Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:00:47AM +0100]:
The mirror split is a complicated endeavour. From what I understood,
the NEW queue was put on hold on purpose until the split is
complete.
Ouch. If that is
xvidcap -- 1 year. If the ffmpeg source code is removed from the source
package,
could this go in? FTPmasters?
mozilla-firefox-adblock -- 5 months. Why is this not going in?
cvsconnect, cvssuck -- 4 months. Why are these not going in or being rejected?
mozilla-thunderbird-locale-cs -- 3
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 06:53:08PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month ago.
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
[Steinar H. Gunderson]
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by
one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else.
I guess that one person got busy or demotivated. I suspect NEW
processing in
On Mon, March 13, 2006 01:39, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 06:53:08PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a
month ago.
Perhaps the ftpmasters are busy with the mirror split?
I don't think it's useful to
53 matches
Mail list logo
