Bug#539705: can we proceed?
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:50:57 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: Unless I'm mistaken, all the required components for this new MESA and the new X.org to go into Testing are ready. Shall we remove this artificial RC bug then? Not unless we want to ignore xserver-xorg-video-intel bugginess. I'm not sure that we do, at this point. If -intel is the problem, then why don't we block that one, instead of blocking the whole X transition by blocking mesa? Martin-Éric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#539705: can we proceed?
2009/9/12 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org: On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 13:18:16 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:50:57 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: Unless I'm mistaken, all the required components for this new MESA and the new X.org to go into Testing are ready. Shall we remove this artificial RC bug then? Not unless we want to ignore xserver-xorg-video-intel bugginess. I'm not sure that we do, at this point. If -intel is the problem, then why don't we block that one, instead of blocking the whole X transition by blocking mesa? Is this a joke? Intel has all the paid developers in the world to look after that particular issue with their driver. Meanwhile, the rest of X works fine as it is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#539705: can we proceed?
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 13:18:16 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:50:57 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: Unless I'm mistaken, all the required components for this new MESA and the new X.org to go into Testing are ready. Shall we remove this artificial RC bug then? Not unless we want to ignore xserver-xorg-video-intel bugginess. I'm not sure that we do, at this point. If -intel is the problem, then why don't we block that one, instead of blocking the whole X transition by blocking mesa? Is this a joke? Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#539705: can we proceed?
Martin-Éric Racine wrote: Intel has all the paid developers in the world to look after that particular issue with their driver. Meanwhile, the rest of X works fine as it is. Intel from testing doesn't work with Xserver 1.6. Brice -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#539705: can we proceed?
Unless I'm mistaken, all the required components for this new MESA and the new X.org to go into Testing are ready. Shall we remove this artificial RC bug then? Martin-Éric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#539705: can we proceed?
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:50:57 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: Unless I'm mistaken, all the required components for this new MESA and the new X.org to go into Testing are ready. Shall we remove this artificial RC bug then? Not unless we want to ignore xserver-xorg-video-intel bugginess. I'm not sure that we do, at this point. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
