Re: sprint for separating release from ftp-master
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 07:00:08PM +, Peter Palfrader wrote: > Hi, > > we (the release team, by remote participation the FTP-team, and DSA) are > planning a sprint for entangling release from ftp-master infrastructure. > > Time and location would be at the debian sun camp [DSC]. > > We have four people who have asked for sponsorship to offset (parts) of > travel and accommodation costs. Budget estimate is 1500 EUR. > Please approve. Approved up to 2000 EUR. Neil signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: 8.2 and 7.9 planning
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:52:49PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: 5/6th - okay for me Fine. 12/13th - the 12th doesn't work for me until at least mid-afternoon I'm away I'm afraid. 19th/20th - looks okay 26th/27th - looks okay Both work for me. Neil
Re: 8.1 (and maybe 7.9) planning
On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 12:08:59PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: May 23/24 Offline-ish on May 23. Same for me. May 30/31 OK. OK June 6/7 Offline on June 6, offline-ish on June 7. OK June 13/14 Offline-ish on June 13. OK June 20/21 OK. Offline-ish both these days. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: 7.8 dates
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 08:33:51PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: 3rd / 4th - I'm busy on the Saturday 10th / 11th - Fine for me 17th / 18th - jmw's BSP afternoon to Sunday afternoon 31st / 1st - Fine for me All fine. 24th / 25th - I can do Saturday morning, but will be afk from early I could probably do the Sunday afternoon, but nothing before then. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141210115932.gc3...@halon.org.uk
Bug#767275: unblock: wget/1.16-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Dear lovely release team, TL;DR: # CVE-2014-4887 unblock wget/1.16-1 age-days 2 wget/1.16-1 wget 1.16 in unstable currently fixes CVE-2014-4887: Absolute path traversal vulnerability in GNU Wget before 1.16, when recursion is enabled, allows remote FTP servers to write to arbitrary files, and consequently execute arbitrary code, via a LIST response that references the same filename within two entries, one of which indicates that the filename is for a symlink. This is rather a rather nasty security bug, so should probably get into testing a) before the freeze (which it won't do at the moment) and b) before it gets tangled in the nettle transition (which hopefully won't happen, but you know what happens sometimes with transitions...) Thanks! Neil -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (650, 'testing'), (500, 'testing-updates'), (500, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: 7.7 planning
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:38:37AM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: We're (over)due another wheezy point release; this time, 7.7. I propose we go for one of: 11/12 October 18/19 October 25/26 October All of these are still good for me. All fine for me too. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: 7.6 and 6.0.10
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:53:21PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Giving ourselves the usual pre-window to get organised, some suggested dates would be: - June 28/29 If it's early on the 29th, that's ok. Otherwise I'll be away. I could do it at a push though - July 5/6 Running a half marathon, so not free :) - July 12/13 - July 19/20 - July 26/27 All fine. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140605121637.go7...@halon.org.uk
Re: Scheduling the 7.5 point release
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 06:35:59PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 23:03 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 09:01 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2014-03-01 at 21:44 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: We are slowly starting to prepare for the 7.5 point release and are suggesting one of the four following weekends: Based on the replies and looking again at a calendar, let's go for: * April 26th/27th Given a regression in the latest kernel upload in p-u (#745137) and a lack of feedback so far on one of the larger hardware backports included therein (igb), I'm wondering if it might make sense to push the date back a week, to May 3rd, and give ourselves time to get things sorted without rushing at the end of the week. Ack. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140422124809.gx6...@halon.org.uk
Re: Scheduling the 7.5 point release
On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 09:44:38PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: * April 12th/13th * April 19th/20th (Easter) * April 26th/27th * May 3rd/4th Please reply before the 15th of March with your preferred date(s). These are all fine by me. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303105123.gv12...@halon.org.uk
Re: Scheduling 7.4 and 6.0.9
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:50:27AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Our standard time intervals lead to us looking at point releases for both stable and oldstable during February. The weekend of the 1st / 2nd February is FOSDEM, so probably best avoided. :-) How are people fixed for: 8th / 9th February 15th / 16th February 22nd / 23rd February 1st / 2nd March All fine by me. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140108141215.gb19...@halon.org.uk
Re: Why does libgeotiff-dev depend on libtiff5-dev ?
Hi Jay, On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:18:05AM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: The release team has not yet found the time to reply to my message of May 6 on when they will be ready to think about the tiff transition or whether my plans for the transition are okay. (It is not my intention to be critical of the release team. They do a great job and are volunteers with limited time just like the rest of us.) Apologies for the lack of reply - we've been quite busy with the point release recently, and still slightly recovering from the release itself. I imagine that your mail has been overlooked due to it not having a current open bug. Would it be possible to run reportbug release.debian.org, and open a new transition bug? Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Wheezy point release planning
Hi, On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:01:38PM +0200, Francesca Ciceri wrote: Hi, On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Hi, Based on some informal queries a little while ago, the weekend of 15/16 June looks like a good date for the first wheezy point release. Would that work for everyone? It wouldn't probably work for me, but if no one else from press can, I'll try to be available. Depends on exact timing - I'll be (hopefully) in Montreal that weekend so in theory I'm free at UTC-5. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Hurd and the archive
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:07:42AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: Neil McGovern, le Tue 07 May 2013 11:14:01 +0100, a écrit : On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months, so it is basically network board drivers from linux 2.6.32, and IDE disk support. I for instance installed it on my Dell D430, and network just works fine. Working on a SATA driver should not be a problem. I just haven't put it high on my TODO list, and have rather worked on the Wheezy release whenever I had time to. Basically: in about 1 months time, will I be able to install it with a default installation process, and have it working on: a) A HP DL360 or similar b) A Dell inspiron 660s or similar c) A Lenovo Thinkpad X220 or similar I don't know what ethernet driver these would need. 2.6.32 linux kernels already have e1000, 8139*, tg3 etc. drivers. This is the usual issue of not-so-mature systems, just like Linux had in its early days. How about things like wireless drivers, raid controllers, suspend/resume, power management etc? About disk support, I happen to have right now a few days of holiday with no RL plans (at last!), so I'll work on the SATA driver. Having it working within a month should just happen. But not tested - how about USB - did that ever get sorted? d) VMWare/VBox etc. This already works. Just tried it with vbox - as soon as I selected 'text install', I got a critical error and the vm stopped. For something to be accepted in testing, it should be in a releaseable state. This isn't something I can see happening for Hurd. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Hurd and the archive
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:33:03PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: Neil McGovern, le Wed 08 May 2013 11:35:52 +0100, a écrit : But not tested - how about USB - did that ever get sorted? We have not worked on it. How about things like wireless drivers, raid controllers, suspend/resume, power management etc? There are some wireless drivers for pcmcia cards (e.g. orinoco, hermes). No raid support. No suspend/resume or power management. I'm wondering: if I had spent time on these instead of working on Wheezy, I guess people wouldn't have been happy either. I wonder what I should have done at all. And when these get implemented, I guess we'll be asked for 3D acceleration, backlight tuning, memory hotplug, etc. etc.? No, just something that works for the majority of our users. I'm fairly sure things like SATA and USB is considered essential. d) VMWare/VBox etc. This already works. Just tried it with vbox - as soon as I selected 'text install', I got a critical error and the vm stopped. I don't have this issue at all, things just go fine here with both the other/other template and the Linux/Linux template. This message comes from vbox I guess (there is no such message in Mach or the Hurd), so I'd tend to think virtualbox has some issues in your setup. I installed virtualbox on a standard Wheezy system, with other/other and 2G ram. For something to be accepted in testing, it should be in a releaseable state. Which we haven't seen very precisely defined still. Or at least we have this criterium: I'll see if I can be clear: I will not be putting Hurd in testing in the next few months. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Hurd and the archive
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: We have not worked too much on the hardware support in the past months, so it is basically network board drivers from linux 2.6.32, and IDE disk support. I for instance installed it on my Dell D430, and network just works fine. Working on a SATA driver should not be a problem. I just haven't put it high on my TODO list, and have rather worked on the Wheezy release whenever I had time to. Basically: in about 1 months time, will I be able to install it with a default installation process, and have it working on: a) A HP DL360 or similar b) A Dell inspiron 660s or similar c) A Lenovo Thinkpad X220 or similar d) VMWare/VBox etc. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Hurd and the archive
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: So, release people: How likely is it that Hurd gets added to jessie? Within the next one or two months I mean, not maybe in a years time. :) I don't see it happening, to be honest. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#705356: unblock: netbase/5.1
Hi Marco, On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 04:14:13AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: Yes, but they are all trivial changes. [...] OK, I suck as a maintainer and as a human being and I neglected my packages for most of the last year. But I'd rather move on and fix what can still be fixed. [...] Why? netbase is just four config files nowadays, it's not like declaring it foreign could break anything. Firstly, thanks for your care of this package, it's very much appreciated! Unfortunately, we've now reached the stage of the release where we can't accept non RC fixes, have a look at http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html for information on what can be accepted. I'm sure you'll appreciate the immense amount of work that we have to do as a release team, and thus we simply don't have the capacity to look at packges which don't address the above. Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#698117: unblock: rebuildd/0.4.2
tags 698117 moreinfo user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org usertags 671635 wheezy-will-remove thanks On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 02:51:36PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: The time spent by the RM and the maintainer to prepare and accept the tpu upload is higher than adding a simple unblock (assuming they do not review everything because at worst it can always be removed). Unfortunately, we are at the stage that we do review everything, and have been for a while. Is there likely to be a t-p-u upload fixing the RC bug only, ie: the patch in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=671635#20, or should I look for a removal? Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#678979: request freeze exception for slony1-2
user debian-rele...@packages.debian.org usertags 678979 wheezy-will-remove thanks On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:44:15PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 11:38 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 14:30 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 21/09/2012 04:58, Peter Eisentraut wrote: According to bug #678979 [0], which was submitted by the lead upstream developer, slony 2.0 does not work well with postgresql 9.1. Therefore, we had to resolve to making an upgrade to slony version 2.1, and I request that that be allowed into wheezy now. [...] Unfortunately, we are not able to accept such large changes at this stage of the freeze. [2] Since slony in Debian have little popcon, does it make sense to skip the Wheezy release? iow, remove slony from wheezy (since it doesn't work and we are not able to accept the new one). Alternatively, we could very well accept a targeted fix based on current Wheezy's version… (correct me if I'm wrong), the discussion in #678979 made me think that it was not possible to extract a minimal patch. Ping? As far as I'm concerned, the matter is closed. The above doesn't actually help, as I generally don't like trying to read maintainers minds. In the absence of further action, I'm tagging this wheezy-will-remove. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#698984: unblock: simpleid - fixes RC issue with OpenID 2.0 support
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:20:56AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: If it is essential, I can make a 0.8.1-13 upload with the extra changelog detail against 0.8.1-11 Hi, We won't accept any changes to packaging systems, and we won't review anything without a diff. PLEASE go read http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#699012: unblock: netgen/4.9.13.dfsg-3.2
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:35:16AM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 09:54:36AM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: +netgen (4.9.13.dfsg-3.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low + + * Non-maintainer upload. Have the maintainers commented on your proposed change? Additionally, there's another RC bug in the Uploaders field - You can't have a comma as part of a name. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Postpone fix for 540512 and 538822 till after release (dash and sh diversions)
Control: tag 540512 +wheezy-ignore Control: tag 538822 +wheezy-ignore This is obviously not going to get fixed this time. Adding ignore tags. On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:40:58PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: There has been a small discussion about dash RC bugs 538822 and 540512 in the bts and the general idea is to postpone the proper fix (again) till after the release. Do you agree, and if so, can you tag this bug appropriate as wheezy-ignore? If you do, these bugs should again affects release-notes as well. I believe the previous text in the release-notes were fine. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#690402: RM: scim-prime/1.0.0-4
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 09:56:08PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Removal hint added. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#694975: release.debian.org: Wheezy-ignore tag for freecad and netgen
Hi, On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 02:46:29PM +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: thanks for looking into this bug. VCS of coin3d has a COPYING file, which is clearly BSD-license [1]. So this version should be packaged to fix the license issue properly. The current version of coin is GPL [2]. This doesn't actually answer Adam's query, which is: What license is the version of coin3d currently in wheezy and linked with the freecad packages in wheezy released under? I didn't see anything obvious on the upstream homepage which indicated that earlier versions had been relicensed; in that case whilst it looks like the issues may well be solved for jessie, it still leaves us with a set of packages in wheezy which we can't distribute. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Depends on about-to-go-away youtube-dl
Package: freevo Severity: grave Hi, Youtube-dl is about to be removed from testing. As freevo depends on it, it is also a candidate for removal. Please let debian-release@lists.debian.org know how you plan on handling this issue. Thanks, Neil -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: pre-approval for fixing some important bugs discovered by piuparts for wheezy
Hi, On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:25:14PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: what's the release team opinion on fixing several important bugs for wheezy? These are problems discovered by piuparts and all have bugs filed long ago, usually with a sentence like Getting the archive piuparts-clean is a release goal since lenny. Some of them already have patches attached, but most with no maintainer action. As per my last mail[0] to d-d-a, these are no longer considered important in their own right, so don't fit the freeze criteria. Sorry to disappoint. Neil [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2013/01/msg5.html -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#698984: unblock: simpleid - fixes RC issue with OpenID 2.0 support
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:38:27PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: I simply haven't included any patches with any prior version of the package, so I haven't needed to rely on any 1.0 or 3.0 methods for including a patch Again, I'm going to point at the freeze policy. Specifically Rule 1. I've attached a debdiff for 0.8.1-10 - 0.8.3-1 [ 111 files changed, 12616 insertions(+), 12626 deletions(-) , due to lots of reasons in original mail] This still doesn't make it reviewable I'm afraid. I believe the use of the 0.8.3 release is not RC, but it does fix one important bug and it also fixes the original RC bug without having to rely on the patching process (so I could delete debian/patches and revert to debian/source/format 1.0) Can you fix the RC bug, by itself, without changing the source format? If not, I'll simply remove it, simpleid-ldap and dynalogin from testing, especially as popcon seems to indicate that no one actually uses it, and it wasn't in a previous stable release. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130126130936.gd6...@halon.org.uk
Bug#699035: unblock: unattended-upgrades/0.79.4
Hi, On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 04:26:53PM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: The fix is to add missing dependency on xz-utils. Also a unit tests is added explicitly testing xz compressed deb. This doesn't look clean due to changes in: --- unattended-upgrades-0.79.3/test/aptroot/var/log/apt/history.log 2012-08-07 11:20:17.0 +0100 +++ unattended-upgrades-0.79.4/test/aptroot/var/log/apt/history.log 2013-01-21 16:29:47.0 + --- unattended-upgrades-0.79.3/test/aptroot/var/log/apt/term.log 2012-08-07 11:20:17.0 +0100 +++ unattended-upgrades-0.79.4/test/aptroot/var/log/apt/term.log 2013-01-21 16:29:47.0 + --- unattended-upgrades-0.79.3/test/aptroot/var/log/unattended-upgrades.log 2012-08-07 11:20:17.0 +0100 +++ unattended-upgrades-0.79.4/test/aptroot/var/log/unattended-upgrades.log 2013-01-21 16:29:47.0 + Should these actually have changed? Why are they in the upload? Can you have a look please? Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Pkg-ace-devel] Bug#697847: missing source for Win32 binaries
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:26:37PM +0100, Thomas Girard wrote: Since my GPG key has expired, I will not be able to upload this in a timely fashion, so you can consider this email as a call for NMU. For info, you can simply change the expiration date... Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130111094715.gy6...@halon.org.uk
Bug#692734: unblock: ettercap/0.7.5-4
Hi, 365 files changed, 23718 insertions(+), 14033 deletions(-) This isn't something that can be reviewed, especially with the large number of unrelated changes to (for example build system switch!) the package. The options remaining are: * Backport specific fixes for the version in testing * Remove the package Could you please indicate if you wish to do the first or the second. Thanks, Neil On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 11:03:59PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: That is a matter of release policy. I believe I've made clear my own recommended action, listed the alternative possibilities I consider realistic, and given supporting reasoning. After that, this becomes a matter for the release team to decide. They can take my recommendation, or do something else, as they wish. It is ridiculous process-over-sense to say that the release team should ask me, via your sending me your interpretation of their policy document, to ask them to do something which you think they've already decided to do. (Especially when I don't think what you seem to think they've already decided to do is the best option.) After all, if they have decided to do something, they can just do it. We're trying to produce a good operating system here, not an improv parody of paralyzing procedure-heavy bureaucratic inertia. It's a bit frustrating to see that the release gets delayed because of situations like these. Ettercap is a minor leaf package. This issue is not a release delayer. --Barak. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871udvs2e8@cs.nuim.ie -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#692734: unblock: ettercap/0.7.5-4
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 02:40:25PM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: As I've stated previously, I don't believe that backporting fixes is really feasible. There are too many, they are mixed with non-security-related modifications, there would be enormous opportunity for error, and ongoing security maintenance would be quite difficult. Do you have CVE numbers, BTS references or any further detail? These very changes make it not suitable for update when we've been frozen for over 6 months. Some background: upstream development stalled, and a new team has (with the blessing of the retired old team) taken over. The new team is willing to do security updates on their versions, but it is not realistic to expect them to be able to do security patches for an ancient version full of backported patches. No, that's what we expect *you* to do as the maintainer. If you feel you cannot support software for the length of the stable release, then it's simple: find help or let's not have it in a stable release. On the other hand, I personally don't see any disadvantage to letting 0.7.5* in and pulling it if there is a problem, instead of just pulling it preemptively in case there is a problem. Because by that stage a number of people will have already installed it and we have provided a commitment to have it in the release. So that is my recommendation. The choice, however, is with the release team. That's not going to happen. So, can you please let me know if you're going to backport the fixes, or if I should remove it from wheezy. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130109152458.gn6...@halon.org.uk
Bug#694378: Bug#683803: apt-cacher-ng: errors in combination with http.debian.net: [302 Moved Temporarily]
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: Hallo, * Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]: any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with (what will become) stable. #694378 is there to get an answer to this question, apparently RM team prefers to look away ATM. Responding to the comments left by integri would perhaps be a good idea. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Release talk at FOSDEM?
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:41:11AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Since we'll have released by then[1], I thought it might be nice if you guys were to hold a talk at FOSDEM about the past release process and/or the upcoming one. Anyone up for that? I won't be attending this year - anyone else? Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#694378: Bug#683803: apt-cacher-ng: errors in combination with http.debian.net: [302 Moved Temporarily]
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: Hallo, * Gabriele Stilli [Tue, Dec 25 2012, 10:10:36PM]: any chance of having this fix backported to Wheezy? It's quite annoying not being able to do proper upgrades when using http.debian.net with (what will become) stable. #694378 is there to get an answer to this question, apparently RM team prefers to look away ATM. Responding to the comments left by integri would perhaps be a good idea. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#690557: unblock: git-buildpackage/0.6.0~git20120822
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:14:41PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote: On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:39:06PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: In meanwhile I think the debdiff is too huge to have this for an unblock to wheezy. I suggest to close this request to reduce the current open unblock requests. Do you agree Guido? I'm still hoping to see a current version in wheezy and I fail to see why we can't update such a leaf package. Please see the freeze policy at http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html I know that the freeze was announced but sometimes real lifes doesn't fit too well to these kind of deadlines. That's why it was announced a YEAR in advance. Anyway, closing this bug. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#695158: wheezy-ignore tag for RC bug #591969 in typo3-src
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 08:01:58PM +0100, Tobias Hansen wrote: the discussion in RC bug #591969 ended with a call for a wheezy-ignore tag. The bug was also tagged squeeze-ignore. What does the release team say? In general, I'm fairly loathed to add a *second* release ignore tag. Can someone explain: 1) Why there were no updates to the bug between December 2010 and June 2012? 2) What action is being taken to resolve the unbuildability of the AS1 SWFs? 3) What action is being taken to resolve the bugs in as3compile (with bugrefs?) 4) How likely it is that this bug will be fixed before jessie? 5) Why simply not removing the package would be a better idea? Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Wheezy-ignore for good-not-evil bugs
tags 692614 + wheezy-ignore tags 692619 + wheezy-ignore tags 692624 + wheezy-ignore tags 692625 + wheezy-ignore tags 692627 + wheezy-ignore tags 692628 + wheezy-ignore tags 692629 + wheezy-ignore tags 692630 + wheezy-ignore tags 692631 + wheezy-ignore tags 692613 + wheezy-ignore tags 692615 + wheezy-ignore tags 692626 + wheezy-ignore tags 692621 + wheezy-ignore thanks These bugs aren't gonna get fixed in time - tagging ignore appropriately. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#692327: libotr: Please provide libotr2
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:59:11PM +0100, Thibaut VARENE wrote: And I see nothing wrong with breaking packages in unstable, but maybe there too I'm mistaken. Yes, as you breaking a package in unstable may: a) Break other packages b) Remove the ability to update via unstable if a RC bug does appear in your package. I would also suggest having a read through http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseProposals if you're interested in alternate release methods. Neil, RM du jour. -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#682908: Is this a done deal?
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:27:07AM -0400, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote: Emacs 24 has been in pre-release mode So... not actually released then. Anyways, this doesn't answer my question, which I've asked thrice. Here it goes again: is this a done deal, and we're getting an ancient (yes, ancient) Emacs version for wheezy? You've had your answer. Please don't post on this subject again. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683299: unblock: open-vm-tools/2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-3
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:07:14PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: On 07/30/2012 10:02 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: Or if you prefer, I can remove the package from wheezy, that works just as well as far as I'm concerned, but I thought I'd give it a chance. feel free to do so if you think that this is what in the users interest, after all it's your call, not mine. I'm sorry, but I don't accept this. You failing to either do the work in time for a freeze that has been advertised more than a year in advance, and then failing to justify your random uploads is absolutely, 100% NOT the fault of the release team, it is yours. I will not allow you to try and lay the blame at anyone's feet but your own for this. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 07:52:18PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 11:59:07 +0200, Neil McGovern wrote: Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway: Well then, thanks for taking the time. Some questions: dpkg-1.16.8/dpkg-deb/main.c - -h|--helpShow this help message.\n - --versionShow the version.\n + -?, --help Show this help message.\n + --versionShow the version.\n Why are you removing -h? Using -h (or -H) on a program that you don't know its command-line options could produce surprising effects, as such the only safe option that can be used blindly is really --help, which is unambiguous (or -? now). Keeping -h does not seem useful after those, so I removed them. This really doesn't fit with any of the freeze guidelines, but lots of the other bits don't either. Jonathan has already replied to the other inquiries. However, unblocked and set to age-days 30. Please note that future uploads will invalidate this unblock, and I'm hopeful that any future requests will strictly follow guidelines and introduce the absolute minimal changes needed. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 07:18:29PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 17:51:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Nope, 1.16.5. I'd like to see that to get a view as to why 1.16.5 was broken. Once we've managed to have a look at that, it may give a clue as to if it's worth reviewing the giant-diff-from-doom. Thanks, attached the filtered diff (with additional junk left by filterdiff, but left the changelog) from git: Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway: Some questions: dpkg-1.16.8/dpkg-deb/main.c - -h|--helpShow this help message.\n - --versionShow the version.\n + -?, --help Show this help message.\n + --versionShow the version.\n Why are you removing -h? dpkg-1.16.8/lib/dpkg/ar.c + if (strlen(name) 15) + ohshit(_(ar member name '%s' length too long), name); + if (size 99L) + ohshit(_(ar member size %jd too large), size); + Why 99? dpkg-1.16.8/scripts/Dpkg/Deps.pm -(any) # architecture name +([a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9-]*) # architecture name Why the additional restriction? *.gmo - are you sure you're meant to be shipping these in the tarball? Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 11:59:07AM +0200, Neil McGovern wrote: On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 07:18:29PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 17:51:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Nope, 1.16.5. I'd like to see that to get a view as to why 1.16.5 was broken. Once we've managed to have a look at that, it may give a clue as to if it's worth reviewing the giant-diff-from-doom. Thanks, attached the filtered diff (with additional junk left by filterdiff, but left the changelog) from git: Right, the delta diff was small enough that I actually put in the time to look at the full diff. This took a number of hours, but anyway: Oh, and also, I want to see a specific ack/nack from the SRMs for: --- dpkg-1.16.4.3/debian/source/options 2012-06-09 14:32:05.0 + +++ dpkg-1.16.8/debian/source/options 2012-07-19 12:27:34.0 + @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ -# Use bzip2 compression by default, we save 2.5Mb -compression = bzip2 +# Use xz compression by default, we save 4.6 MiB +compression = xz Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#681687: missing mime entry
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: If it's the solution that the TC decide on to resolve the issue, it sounds like something we could work with, at least imho, from what I've seen so far. I've CCed -release for any further comments, as I don't know how many members of the team are following -ctte and/or this bug. Broadly speaking, I think the correct long-term solution is to first add support to update-mime for reading both .desktop files and mime files, and then to update policy to tell maintainers to use .desktop files instead of mime files. And I think it's better for Debian if we can get the first part done prior to the wheezy release. But I would like the release team to make their own determination of whether the patch that's currently up for consideration is of sufficient quality, and sufficiently safe, to be granted a freeze exception. I completely agree with getting rid of the manual mime entries where they can be automatically generated. I have concerns that the .desktop format means that it won't work for some packages, but those could always carry manual entires. However, I really do think that pushing in a system wide change at this stage in the release is not desireable at all, so woudn't be happy to see it in Wheezy. If we wanted to do this, it should have been started about two years ago. I *would* however, be very happy to have this as a release goal for wheezy+1. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
Hi, On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 09:56:24PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 09:42:18 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Advancing that as much as you can would certainly be useful to catch any errors, and to ensure translators get a chance to contribute. So, the upload happened few days later than planned, but still before the freeze deadline. ITYM the day of the freeze, 10 days later... But because there were posterior uploads to fix regressions, RC bugs and translation updates the automatic freeze exception does not apply anymore. That would be correct, yes. It is only versions that are in unstable at the time that get an unblock. The way I understood the freeze (as any feature freeze) was that code with new features on unstable at the time of the freeze would go in (JFTR there's been no new features added afterwards), even if they'd require to review the subsequent changes and update the version in the unblock. Um, no. It's not a feature freeze. It's a Debian freeze, as has been for the past 8 or so years. This means that someone on the release team has to manually review the patchset. It could have happened that those regressions could have been spotted instead after the version would have migrated to testing, or regressions for the version in testing still be discovered, so I don't see the big difference really. Ah, perhaps this is the confusion. The difference is the amount of time it will take the release team to manually review every patch set. Just to clarify, because it might have seemed otherwise in my mail to the unblock request, personally I don't have any problem per se with a whole review of the diff between the version in testing and the one in unstable. And even way way longer than usual delay in transitioning the package from unstable, say at least one more month or more, to catch any other possible regression if there's fear of that. Yes, the issue is that the release team need to manually review the patch set, not you. But then I don't think having to argue over every and each change in 1.16.5, or having to prepare releases through t-p-u, with the implication of needing to reissue a call for translators is a good way of spending our collective time. Well, it requires much less work for the release team, who no longer need to manually review the patch set. And while it's not like we are releasing immediately anyway, doing the above just implies more work for everyone, which certainly does not help speeding up the release process. I've started to see this in a couple of places now. Let me be as clear as possible in case anyone hasn't noticed. * *** WE HAVE FROZEN DEBIAN WHEEZY. *** * This does not mean you can upload random stuff to the archive because the release is ages away. This sort of wooly thinking helps generate a self fulfilling prophecy that delays the release and harms Debian overall. It means that the release team need to spend a lot of manual time reviewing the patch sets and thus can't concentrate on RC bugs. But then if you still disagree and require us to go through the stuff in the above paragraphs, then I think I'll just take the blame for my misunderstanding, notify translators they should stop bothering, pofusely apologize to them, and very regretably leave the IMO worse 1.16.4.3 version for wheezy, and call it a day. That is of course, your perogative. However, if you could kindly prepare a patchset between 1.16.5 and whatever you want to migrate, with all the translation and documentation changes stripped out, lets see how big that is. Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 06:38:21PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 15:14:15 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: That is of course, your perogative. However, if you could kindly prepare a patchset between 1.16.5 and whatever you want to migrate, with all the translation and documentation changes stripped out, lets see how big that is. ITYM 1.16.4.3. Nope, 1.16.5. I'd like to see that to get a view as to why 1.16.5 was broken. Once we've managed to have a look at that, it may give a clue as to if it's worth reviewing the giant-diff-from-doom. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mumble migration block
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 12:48:34PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Can you please make sure that mumble 1.2.3-349-g315b5f5-2 does not migrate to wheezy ? In particular, please do not accept an unblock request for it or for any later version. I've commented out the automatic unblock it was granted. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120720115347.gq5...@halon.org.uk
Re: mumble and celt, #682010, TC
Hi, On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:24:12AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: The problem with mumble and the celt codec has been referred to the TC - see the bug mentioned above. I would be interested to hear from the security and release teams. I consider there to be two issues which would concern me from a release point of view: * That, given the potential problems and issues as discussed in the log, a sufficiently experienced maintainer can be found to deal with the package for the supported lifetime of a stable+oldstable release. * That the package is likely to be able to communicate with non-debian derived distributions. If both of these cannot be satisfied, I would consider the package to be unreleaseable and would look for removal. * Would the release team be happy with a reintroduction for wheezy of the celt package containing the 0.7.1 codec ? I don't know yet whether mumble would need to be updated too. Obviously this would have to be done promptly. Hrm. I'd point out at this point that celt 0.7.1-1 currently exists in wheezy. It's not going anywhere because mumble in testing currently depends on it. For any updates, we would apply the freeze criteria as specified at http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html Additionally, I would not be keen at this stage to update other packages to re-depend on celt - mumble should be the exception. I'm also a little disappointed that the version in unstable would cause communication problems which means that any updates need to go through t-p-u. I haven't looked at depth in this, but would re-adding the celt dependancy to the sid package, and getting it back in unstable make the world happy again? Finally, it would be wonderful if this could all be sorted out in unstable and then someone can let us know what's going on with a coherent message, that would be fantastic. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120719151458.gk5...@halon.org.uk
Re: mumble and celt, #682010, TC
[resent... signed this time. Again] On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:45:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: * That the package is likely to be able to communicate with non-debian derived distributions. The information we seem to be getting is that it is indeed likely that the mumble we have will be able to do so, because mumble upstream have somehow nominated or blessed 0.7.1. The above may, or may not conflict with: * If we cannot find a maintainer for celt who looks like they'll be able to handle it for the lifetime of wheezy then we need to allow the current mumble (and perhaps other rdepends) in sid to propagate and will then be able to remove celt from wheezy. I would be concerned if the mumble client in wheezy isn't able to call non-debian derived mumble servers. * We need to decide whether any other rdepends on celt in wheezy need to have the celt support removed in wheezy. A quick dak rm -R -n -s testing celt seems to think not, but I could be wrong. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mumble and celt, #682010, TC
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:45:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: * That the package is likely to be able to communicate with non-debian derived distributions. The information we seem to be getting is that it is indeed likely that the mumble we have will be able to do so, because mumble upstream have somehow nominated or blessed 0.7.1. The above may, or may not conflict with: * If we cannot find a maintainer for celt who looks like they'll be able to handle it for the lifetime of wheezy then we need to allow the current mumble (and perhaps other rdepends) in sid to propagate and will then be able to remove celt from wheezy. I would be concerned if the mumble client in wheezy isn't able to call non-debian derived mumble servers. * We need to decide whether any other rdepends on celt in wheezy need to have the celt support removed in wheezy. A quick dak rm -R -n -s testing celt seems to think not, but I could be wrong. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120719165432.gn5...@halon.org.uk
Re: Fixing the mime horror ini Debian
severity 658139 serious clone 658139 -1 reassign -1 tech-ctte block 658139 by -1 thanks Hi Michael, As per http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities, the severity of this bug is serious as in the release manager's opinion, this makes the package unsuitable for release. Please do NOT simply downgrade this to wishlist a third time, especially without explanation. I have already said that you should re-assign to tech-ctte if you're not happy with this, and instead a wontfix tag has been given to the bug. Thus, I am reassigning to tech-ctte to ask if they wish to overrule this decision. Thanks, Neil On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 04:34:35PM -0600, Neil McGovern wrote: Hence, I consider this bug serious and thus RC, and am reassigning to evince. Feel free to pop it over to tech-ctte if you don't agree. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120714223435.gu28...@halon.org.uk -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: python-weblib = python-pyweblib
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 10:49:51PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: the python-weblib package in Debian has recently been taken over by me. The package has a long-standing mis-name bug, since it should be called python-pyweblib to be in alignment with the python policy. Would it be possible to do this rename for wheezy? A transitional python-weblib package would of course be provided. python-weblib does not have any reverse dependencies at this time. Hi, I'm afraid this will have to wait until after the release, it's not something that fits with the freeze criteria. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120714205229.gs28...@halon.org.uk
Re: Fixing the mime horror ini Debian
severity 658139 serious reassign 658139 evince tags 658139 + patch retitle 658139 missing mime entry On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:09:27AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: It does seem quite annoying. Have you considered asking the release team whether they would be inclined to agree that this bug is RC ? I'd be willing to do so but there was no clear consensus in the previous discussion about the severity of this. This bug seems to fall between a couple of stalls. I believe that not shipping this file will harm the release overall as I suspect users would very much like PDFs to open from programs like this. Hence, I consider this bug serious and thus RC, and am reassigning to evince. Feel free to pop it over to tech-ctte if you don't agree. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120714223435.gu28...@halon.org.uk
Bug#680951: unblock: ace-of-penguins/1.3-9
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:19:04PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: 2012-07-10 20:00 Neil McGovern ne...@debian.org: | Hi, | | On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:58:53PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: | | The Fix | |Add required font package to debian/control | | | | +Recommends: xfonts-100dpi 1.3-9 has been uploaded to unstable with this change. Ok, looking at the actual diff, I also see: -45-libpng15 +50-buildflags.patch These aren't mentioned in the changelog - care to explain? Thanks, Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#680951: unblock: ace-of-penguins/1.3-9
Hi, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:58:53PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: | The Fix |Add required font package to debian/control::Depends | +Recommends: xfonts-100dpi + . + NOTE: If you experience problems with the F1 help key, please + make sure you have package xfonts-100dpi installed. It seems that this fix doens't match the description. Why is this not a depends? Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: CD sizes again (and BoF reminder!)
On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 04:22:58PM -0600, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: Ansgar has been experimenting with .deb sizes to make the packages needed for a minimal desktop installation fit in the first CD. It looks like that's doable by switching to xz compression for the involved binaries. Would you grant freeze exceptions for packages that only changes that? Hi, Although this doesn't actually fit with the criteria we've set up, I would consider having things actually fit on CDs. Thus lets just say that this is a release goal and get on with it. So yes. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Freeze exception request for zendframework 1.11.12-1
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 02:21:29PM +0200, Frank Habermann wrote: 4303 files changed, 43422 insertions(+), 12755 deletions(-) Can you please provide a clean patch that we can review, preferably one that doesn't touch every single file. Additionally, do you know what /tmp/q3Y66RZCNJ/zendframework-1.11.12/extras/documentation/api/extras/css/black-tie/images/ui-bg_inset-hard_55_ffeb80_1x100.png et al are doing in the change, as well as a load of documentation fixes? Can't your stable fix simply be applied? :( Hi, i could do that. But i would prefer to accapt the hole package. The version 1.11.12 is the last minor bugfix release in the line of version 1.11. So it makes sense to have this version in wheezy. For a complete changelog of zendframework itself see: http://framework.zend.com/changelog/1.11.12 Hi, And unfortunately those have also happened too late for us to review manually, especially with a patch of that size. Can you prepare and upload the specific fix to t-p-u please? Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120706100319.gt5...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Futur status of RoarAudio packages
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 02:18:58PM +0200, Philipp Schafft wrote: I will file RM requests (also for unstable as I don't see how the situation could be resolved this way) as soon (still wating for the-me to be back from holidays). If there's no r-depends, and the package is removed from unstable, testing will automatically drop the package. So I would suggest dealing with this in unstable. Thanks for your efforts in the past. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Freeze exception request for zendframework 1.11.12-1
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 09:11:35PM +0200, Frank Habermann wrote: Dear release managers, I ask for a freeze exception request for zendframework version 1.11.12-1. This version fixes security bug #679215 and is the last minor bugfix version of zendframework 1.11. Hi, 4303 files changed, 43422 insertions(+), 12755 deletions(-) Can you please provide a clean patch that we can review, preferably one that doesn't touch every single file. Additionally, do you know what /tmp/q3Y66RZCNJ/zendframework-1.11.12/extras/documentation/api/extras/css/black-tie/images/ui-bg_inset-hard_55_ffeb80_1x100.png et al are doing in the change, as well as a load of documentation fixes? Can't your stable fix simply be applied? :( Cheers, Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: libggi removal
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 11:09:04PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: I suggest we remove libggi from Wheezy. It's totally obsolete these days, dead upstream and RC-buggy since 1.5 years (608981). Removing it would involve the following packages: GGI-related and to be removed along, no rev-deps on their own: libgiigic libggimisc libggiwmh libggigcp These packages need to be fixed: zhcon (test compile with ggi dropped was successful) vlc (already dropped support in 2.0.0-1, but apparently maintainers forgot to remove the build-dep) heroes (builds a separate binary package, which can easily be dropped) Ok to proceed? Hi Moritz, Please go ahead, as long as you feel able to handle zhcon/vlc/heroes. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120704095518.ge5...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: songwrite: fixing RC bug would require new source package
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 08:34:24AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: songwrite is currently orphaned and has an RC bug #672210. The problem is that the version of songwrite is much too old, in fact upstream has since october 2007 (!) moved from songwrite to songwrite2. IMHO, fixing #672210 would require to upload a *new* package songwrite2, and make songwrite a transitional package to songwrite2. Would it still be possible to get this into wheezy ? Hi, I'm afraid it's far too late to get songwrite2 in for Wheezy. Either this particular bug needs to be fixed (possibly by changing the struct.pack to be an unsigned byte), or we can remove it from testing. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120704100328.gf5...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Bug#618314 closed by Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org (Bug#659309: Removed package(s) from unstable)
Hi Toni, On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 12:43:50PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote: [snip lots] This will at least prevent practical scim usage in Wheezy for any new installs. I therefore request that you re-think that course of action, and allow swift re-introduction of possibly stripped-down packages [snip lots] I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. If you wish to update scim, the freeze policy is at http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html If you feel scim wouldn't be useful in it's current shape for wheezy, and don't think you can update it given the above, then please file a removal bug against release.debian.org, preferably with the right usertags. Reportbug can help with this. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#650601: Re: Bug#650601: transition: libpng 1.5
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 02:45:14PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote: 2012/6/27 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org: On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 08:45:03 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote: Hi, I am still correcting FTBFS. However, almost packages can shift to libpng 1.5. May I upload libpng 1.5 to unstable? Absolutely not. OK. Does that already mean that it is too late in wheezy? Yes, I'm afraid so. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bits from the Release Team: Final countdown!
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:02:28AM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: ocl-icd is small and the core code should not change a lot until OpenCL 1.3 or more appears. The core code of the version already in testing is very similar to the one waiting in NEW. In that case, hopefully it will be processed before we freeze, or the diff will be small enough that we can review it. Considering the young of the package (upstream and in Debian), the fact that this is a free replacement of non-free packages, the fact that we are at the beginning of the freeze, the fact that there is no reverse dependencies, I would like to ask you for a freeze exception of ocl-icd 1.3-2. Having ocl-icd 1.3-2 in wheezy would improve the quality of wheezy without any risk of problems for the distribution. This could be phrased another way: The package is not shown to be mature enough, is introducing a new package that hasn't been in the main release of debian before, and has missed the freeze date. Not having ocl-icd in wheezy would remove the risk of another package that could go wrong during the release. :) I would suggest we wait and see as per the above. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120627091326.gj11...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Futur status of RoarAudio packages
Hi, On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 09:06:12PM +0200, Philipp Schafft wrote: I have no preference either way, as long as the package complies with release policy, then it may be included in the release. Your answer isn't very helpfull to me as it is. So I have some questions: I think that's because we don't have a strong opinion either way. * If I want to go for keeping it in debian (what I of cause prefer and will do my very best) will you 0) allow uploads while in freeze for packages readding RoarAudio support, 1) will you suggest to do this to people who removed it because of Ron? (Statement on this ML will of cause do, just something I can link). We will allow *unblocks* which comply with the wheezy freeze policy[0], on a case by case basis. I am NOT going to issue a statement other than that, and will NOT direct maintainers in this matter. Your argument with Ron is something that (as I indicated earlier) needs to be solved in unstable, or via the tech-ctte if you're not getting anywhere (I believe that there was a similar bug already open, but I could be wrong). For avoidence of doubt, the release team are not getting involved in your argument. Please take it elsewhere. * If your answer to one of the above question is 'no' I don't feel like spending time on this will help anybody. I suggested to file RMs but you asked to keep them. Shell I just orphan them instead? Please do not get me wrong: I'm very interested in maintainig the packages and ensure they are in a good shape, but I'm not interested in maintaining perfectly useless packages. If the packages are actually useless, I would suggest RM bugs are the best way to go. [0] Note: this is in DRAFT form until we freeze... http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Pending freeze and packages pending upload
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 01:21:30PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: Uploaded. There may be a point release with translation updates and potentially minor bugfixes at some point in the next month or so. Great, thanks. gutenprint 5.2.8 This is a point release with a large number of new printer models being supported. It was released 2 days ago, but we've been waiting on it for months. Quite important for including with wheezy for contemporary printer support. I will package it this weekend. This is done, but I found that upstream accidentally bumped the major version of the libgutenprint2 ABI. They are planning to release 5.2.9 with my patches for correcting the mistake. They should do this by the weekend, but it's possible this will miss the freeze deadline. It would be good to have a freeze exception for this--the work is all done and tested, just waiting on the update from upstream. I can apply my patches directly to the 5.2.8 release any upload now, or I could wait for them to release properly. I would suggest uploading the patched version and then updating to increase the amount of testing it receives. Additionally: sbuild. I'll be working on this once the above two are done. It's not had much work done on it over the last year due to lack of time finishing my PhD and moving jobs, but it does need some bugs fixing for wheezy. This won't have impact on anything else. It would be great if this could be considered for wheezy after the freeze starts because it's unlikely I'll have time until then to start work on it. sbuild is often used by developers who are running stable to build packages for unstable. So it's important that the stable sbuild be able to support all the features needed during wheezy+1 (at least as far as that is possible). I definitely won't have this done for the freeze--I've got to get sysvinit fixed as a priority. It's functional as it stands, but could be better--there are quite a number of bugs I'd like to get addressed for wheezy. If there's important fixes to apply, these can be managed with some small updates. Have a look at http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html which is in DRAFT form until we freeze of an idea of what may be accepted. Thanks, Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120627134308.gl11...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Bits from the Release Team: Final countdown!
Hi, On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:05:26PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:16:07AM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Hi, We know no-one likes reading long mails on d-d-a, so we'll keep this short: we'll be stopping automatic migrations of packages from unstable to testing - aka freezing - on June 30th. Meaning, anyone who'd planned to use debcamp to do some final polish on their package which they'd like to see in the release is now stuffed, and will have to find the time this week. The freeze date was decided in on the 4th June 2011 (over a year ago) and announced to d-d-a in 20110628183405.gr...@feta.halon.org.uk The date for Debconf was decided in October 2011. There was considerable discussion during the sprint as to when would be best, and we picked June as a date after considering when else we could freeze. We did consider the possibility of DebConf clashing, but the previous four debconfs have been held at the end of July/August. I can't speak for the DebConf team, but having orgainsed a debconf before (Edinburgh) I'm aware it can be *very* hard to get accomodation and venue available at the same time. You've done the same thing during the previous release. No we didn't. Is this on purpose? It depends what you mean by 'this'. Freezing when we said we would, over a year ago is very much on purpose. Freezing before DebCamp is not, but explained above and in other mails. Maintainers not fixing their packages before the well announced freeze I would hope is not. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: On the (ab)use of the Urgency field
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:35:41AM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote: It looks like my recent libassa upload fell afoul of this, but it does in fact fix a release critical bug in libassa 3.5.1-1. The -dev package is missing a dependency that makes building against the library impossible. The changelog could have been clearer and I could have filed a bug, but I was lazy. Can you please remove the urgency override? It's important to file these bugs, especially at release/freeze time or we can't tell what the package does. It also seems to fix a bug in the previous upload which was: * New upstream release. * Urgency medium to try and beat the freeze. * debian/source/format: Use 3.0 quilt source format * debian/compat, debian/control, debian/rules: Switch dh - all things which we don't want to see with a medium urgency. However, I've updated the hint to a medium urgency. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: warzone2100 wheezy
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:09:02AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: Dear release team, warzone2100 3.1 beta 11 was released today and I would like it and future 3.1 versions to enter wheezy. 3.1 is the culmination of a year's work and brings some important improvements (like deterministic network multiplayer). The only changes from beta 11 to the final release will be bug fixes. Their plan for 3.1 is to make one small fix to the server code and then do a release candidate. The current version in Debian 2.3.8 is entirely unsupported by upstream and they request that warzone2100 be removed from wheezy if 3.1 is not accepted. Hi, Thanks for your mail. I would suggest considering if you would be happy to support beta 11 for the length of the next release, and if so, upload it to unstable *today*. Then, if the final release is simply bug fixes and the freeze has occured, an exception can be applied for using the standard criteria. If not, then it can be processed through unstable in the usual way. If it's not something you're happy to think about supporting, please let me know and I can file a removal hint for you. Thanks, Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Next upload 2012-06-26 (dpkg 1.16.5)
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 07:32:20AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: I'm planning to upload dpkg 1.16.5 to unstable on the 26th, to be able to finish cleaning up some pending changes I've locally and to give some time for the initial wave of translation updates once I've sent the call. Given that there's no exact date for the freeze yet, I'm not sure if I'm on borrowed time, that's why I'm CCing the release team. I could probably advance the upload by few days though. Hi, You are indeed on borrowed time :) Advancing that as much as you can would certainly be useful to catch any errors, and to ensure translators get a chance to contribute. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Samba 3.6.6 due out July 2nd...
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 08:00:50AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Still, Karolin Seeger, the Samba release manager, announce recently in the samba-technical mailign list tjhat the 3.6.6 release is due out for July 2nd. Hi, This would be too late for the freeze, which will be happening in June. So, I would like to pre-ask for a freeze exception for samba in case wheezy is frozen before July 2nd. Of course, it would be better to do that with a diff, but: - I don't have it - it will be quite big (as I said, many bugfixes). Is there a pre-release or rc candidate that you could upload before the freeze? Given the very low history of regression in Samba 3.6.* release cycle, I think it's a low-risk exception. One of the main issues would be the size of the diff we need to review, hence the suggestion above! Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: sylpheed in wheezy
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 08:58:43AM +0200, Ricardo Mones wrote: Dear Release Team, Sylpheed upstream has published a release plan for next Sylpheed stable version, 3.2 [0] and the release it's planned for next 29 June. If possible, I would like to have this version instead of current beta or the next rc, as it's the version which gets the security fixes from upstream. Hi, I notice you've uploaded the latest beta. I would suggest that packaging and uploading 3.2 the *same day* would be a very good idea, if not before. Have you thought about contacting upstream to get a pre-release out immediately? If so, and you manage to miss the freeze, then hopefully the diff between those versions may be small enough to review. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: claws-mail and claws-mail-extra-plugins in wheezy
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:04:29AM +0200, Ricardo Mones wrote: Claws Mail upstream has also set a release date for the next version [0], which will be on 27 June. Hi, That would be cutting it very fine. If you are happy to maintain the snapshot for the length of a stable release, I would suggest uploading a pre-release version with the frozen pofiles *today* and then the final version on the 27th. Hopefully you may just make it in time... If possible, I'd like this version to be in wheezy too. In case some new plugin is made available on the extra-plugins it will be not added, in order to avoid NEW queue and make this faster. ... unless it involves NEW processing. I would try and avoid that if possible. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GDM 3.4 in wheezy
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 05:18:07PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: as already explained by Jordi, there’s one big remaining bit for GNOME in wheezy: GDM. Currently it is stuck at version 3.0 (mostly because I didn’t have enough time to work on it), and version 3.4 should be hopefully ready for sid within a week or two. Hi, A week or two can be potentially problematic. If it's within a week then it's probable to land before the freeze, but if not then it'll not be something that can be accepted with such a large delta. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Futur status of RoarAudio packages
Hi, On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:41:42PM +0200, Philipp Schafft wrote: I want to ask if the release team decided anything in this direction. Does the release team want a useful version of the package in wheezy? I'm not interested in any discussion but a plain offical statement from the Release Team. It's quite hard to get the Release Team to make an official statement in the timescales you're probably after, especially as you're not looking for any discussion. However, as Release Manager (and I have discussed this with the other RM), my official statement is: I have no preference either way, as long as the package complies with release policy, then it may be included in the release. I would suggest that solving this issue in unstable, one way or the other may be a better area to concentrate your efforts. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe Samuel meant something else In my world it is considered polite to answer questions asked. Even if you don't have the time to reply properly, just say so. I'm still waiting for some kind of feedback, especially the questions. I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it? I generally consider it polite to give people an opportunity to respond before assuming that you're being ignored, especially if it's part of a longer thread. As per my previous mail, I will not be adding hurd to testing for this release. It would affect the release as a whole, and I'm not happy doing that. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120604095624.gu5...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: hurd-i386 qualification for Wheezy
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 06:08:16PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 19.05.2012 19:04, Adam D. Barratt wrote: I'm not sure we've ever released with an architecture which was in either broken or fucked, but hopefully someone will correct me if I'm mistaken on that. Anyone? :-) Opinions as to whether it makes sense to release an architecture in either of those states would also be welcome. I do not think it is sensible to release an architecture that is in broken/fucked. That's what something like debian ports is for. In order to release hurd, even as a tech preview, we need hurd in testing and users actually testing it. This is a problem at this stage because: * there isn't a functional D-I port yet * it doesn't support debian style networking (ifupdown etc) * it doesn't support any meaningful available new hardware (USB, SATA) * its archive coverage is far lower than required Thus, I do not see how we can release with the architecture. More precisely, I do not think that the architecture will give our users the same support and stability as any other architecture in the stable release, and I think that the architecture's inclusion will negatively impact the release process as a whole. Hence, I have updated the architecture release table (http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html) to mark hurd as 'no' as a candidate for a release. I'm aware that this will not be the news that is wanted, but I do believe that it is the correct decision, and it would not be right to delay this further. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Squeeze point release (6.0.5)
press says OK :) Neil On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:11:27PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Hi, press@ / -live *gentle poke* fwiw, the BSP weekend (12/13th) is looking a likely candidate currently. On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 21:06 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: 6.0.5 is somewhat overdue now and I've been procrastinating over organising it for a while. So before I find something else to distract myself with, some suggested dates: May 5/6: Probably doable; would mean we need to close p-u-NEW over the coming weekend. May 12/13: York BSP. Probably not the best time for CDs, given that Steve would be at the wrong end of the country. (As will I, but that's less of an issue) May 19/20: May 26/27: Thoughts / comments? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120427195939.gb16...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
I'm not free on the 25th, 3rd (daytime) and 10th/11th will be sporadic. Others in press may be available :) Neil (Press hat) On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 09:11:46PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 21:36 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: 25-26/2 - Steve's not available for CDs 3-4/3 - Cambridge BSP. Should be do-able as long as I can get decent connectivity at the right time. :-) 10-11/3 - Joerg mentioned he's not available on the Sunday, but that's only really an issue if stuff breaks and it then transpires that Mark's also unavailable to help fix the world. Thoughts / preferences / anything I missed? Press team, -live... ? Regards, Adam -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120221085151.gq...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: Release goal proposal: remove yada
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 01:14:29PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: To get a fuller picture, what are the changes being made to each of the files in question and when/where are they being made? You mentioned earlier that cleaning the package would lead to changes being made - it sounds like the above build may well fail part of the autobuilding section of the RC policy Indeed, that sounds accurate, but I don't personally want to accept this as a release goal without maintainer agreement. Could you perhaps consider opening a bug against the package, saying 'unfit for the archive' or something, and then re-assigning to tech-ctte? Neil -- weasel dpkg: shut up dpkg No, I won't, and you can't make me. :P weasel hah. _I_ can -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110804122327.gj16...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: Upload of dtc-xen 0.5.13-1+squeeze1 in squeeze-proposed-updates
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:22:58AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: Hi Adam, Are you a new member of the release team? If so, then I'm happy there are much needed new members! :) For reference, Adam as been one of the Release *Managers* for over a year now. Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110804171251.gm16...@feta.halon.org.uk
di/cd/release meetup at DebConf
Hi, I'd like to have a sit down with relevant people to work out how we can improve d-i and debian-cd handling for the next release. Please indicate your availability at: http://www.doodle.com/x2kit5h9zurfk6ss Thanks, Neil -- vorlon We need a fresher website - WordPress is the perfect solution, that way the website can get a new look every time a script kiddie comes up with a new design -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110728091659.gb...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: di/cd/release meetup at DebConf
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:16:59AM +0200, Neil McGovern wrote: I'd like to have a sit down with relevant people to work out how we can improve d-i and debian-cd handling for the next release. Please indicate your availability at: http://www.doodle.com/x2kit5h9zurfk6ss To confirm, this is at 2pm BiH time. Meet at the bottom of the stairs to the upper hacklab :) Neil -- Maulkin It's crack addled, but it's replacing crack with crack, so probably best not to force it to go cold turkey during a freeze. It may go psycho and start killing puppies. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110728103217.gg...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: test
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 01:23:51PM +, Camaleón wrote: May I also ask if the idea of a 2-year fixed cycle freeze is still in place (is valid) or has been reviewed and then discarded? The current plan is that we will try the fixed release date for the coming release, and see how it goes. No decision has been made for beyond that. Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110710114347.ga38...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: test
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 08:05:10PM +0200, Camaleón wrote: The rule is that a release is supported up to the next release + 1 year unless the release after the next one comes earlier. So for Lenny that would mean until release date of Squeeze + 1 year (February 6th 2012) unless Wheezy would be released earlier. Obviously Wheezy won't be released before, so Lenny is supported until Febrary next year. Thanks for replying. In this specific case the common rule contradicts the official announcemnet¹ -made by you- on June 2009 so if something has changed in between it would be nice to inform the users about this with a new official confirmation so they can know what's your actual planning. Hi Camaleón, Thanks for getting in touch. I'm afraid that I don't agree with your interpretation of that announcement, and its applicability now, but despite that I do acknowledge it may be useful to provide a confirmation. Thus, you can take this as confirmation that there is no current plan to support 5.0 to 7.0 upgrades, unless we release by February 2012. As we are due to freeze in June 2012, I don't believe that this will occur. Thanks, Neil McGovern Debian Release Manager -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707080311.gv22...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:51:02AM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Sprint -- We feel it would be useful for the Release Team as a whole to get together to think about what the plans are for the next release. As such, we're planning a sprint to meet in person. Details will follow once diaries have been able to be synchronised! Hi all, This now has a wiki page, at http://wiki.debian.org/Sprints/2011/Release We're hoping to hold this in two weeks time in Antwerp. Comments welcome! Neil -- +Mulligan Your folk tale is inconsistent and confusing. +Mulligan I shall round up your local population and tell them good CHRISTIAN folk tales. +Mulligan Then build churches on all your pagan temples in order to stamp out your heathen idolatry. @Ulthar How about I give you the finger, and you give me my temples back? +Mulligan Tell me Mr Ulthar. How will you gather faith when you have no followers? * Mulligan makes a gesture and converts everyone to Christianity. +Mulligan Wow. I think we just summarised 800 years of history in about six sentences. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110522082049.gr...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: sh4 architecture into Wheezy
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 12:58:24PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote: We don't have faster hardware. We think of a too slow thing in a question A test of gcc of sh4 takes time. When there is not a test, a package is done in about two days. How does sh4 become targeted for the release architecture? Can sh4 disable gcc test? I woudn't be particularly happy with that unless the gcc maintainers ok it, and I'm still not sure that two days is also an acceptable timescale. Have you tried a SH4A with a dual core? At the moment, I think that this issue is severe enough that it can't be a release architecture. (Note that if it is solved, there may be other problems, but we can get to those later.) Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110426073922.gc7...@feta.halon.org.uk
Re: sh4 architecture into Wheezy
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 08:02:18AM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote: The package which time needs most is GCC. GCC takes about 6 days. Ouch! That doesn't sound supportable to be honest. Do you have faster hardware? Neil -- Tolimar So we can expect stockholm to be elected in 2009? Ganneff isnt the world own3d by ubuntu then? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110403193719.gb37...@feta.halon.org.uk
Bug#608744: unblock: mercurial-server/1.1-1
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 02:58:41PM +0200, Teodor MICU wrote: 2011/1/3 Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org: On 01/03/2011 11:31 AM, Teodor wrote: Please unblock package mercurial-server. The two RC bugs for this package were fixed so it should get back for inclussion in Debian 6.0 (squeeze). I think it's too late to get it back in Squeeze. I guess this would be the last chance to have mercurial-server in Debian 6.0. It is 26 days old [1] since the RC bugs were fixed and no more issues reported. Please accept it. Hi Teodor, By the looks of things, Mehdi has already replied to your bug saying that we can't accept the package at this stage. Apologies for the disappointment. Neil -- h01ger ETOOMUCHSPANISHTOOFAST -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110124164532.gl7...@halon.org.uk
Re: please migrate mhonarc package to testing
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:45:58AM -0800, Jeff Breidenbach wrote: On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jeff Breidenbach j...@jab.org wrote: diffstat: 61 files changed, 1502 insertions(+), 657 deletions(-) Is all of that necessary to fix the security issues? No. However, I do not have the ability to isolate (and especially validate) just the security fixes. Additionally, it is conservative release that should not break any existing installations. Therefore my formal opinion as package maintainer is the entire 2.6.18 release should ship as the security update. Here are links to the release notes so you can decide for yourself. Hi Jeff, Apologies for the delay in getting back to you. That diffstat is cerainly much larger than can be accepted at this stage in the release. Have you contacted the security team about these? It's possible to look at getting an update in after the release which fixes these specific issues. Thanks, Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110124165026.gm7...@halon.org.uk
Severity
Hia, I'm currently wondering why #598135 is RC. Would someone care to explain what I'm missing? :) Thanks, Neil -- [local irc server has just been brought up] godog suddenly there's quite some silence in the hacklab -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101201201038.gm3...@halon.org.uk
Bug#605238: future unblock: wmanager/0.2.1-9
Hi Peter, thanks for getting in touch On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 02:13:56PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Thanks for your efforts towards great Debian releases! I've made some changes towards a new version of my wmanager package, mainly to close #605043 that the submitter kindly placed at normal severity, although I think that for everyone using wmanagerrc-update in non-English locales with translated update-alternatives messages it pretty much makes this little part of wmanager quite unusable. (I never noticed it since update-alternatives does not have Bulgarian message translations) Seems like it also removes user data, so should be RC. Would this be considered a good enough reason to unblock wmanager-0.2.1-9 for Squeeze? Yes, but.. I've not uploaded it yet, and I've also taken the liberty of making some other changes that should be no-ops from a usability and buildability (to coin a word) standpoint; you may find them in the attached debdiff: These other changes woudn't. Debhelper is especially worrying, it can introduce strange behaviour on some cases. Could we have just the #605043 fix? Thanks, Neil -- i get an error... i forget what it is ... but definitely an error, well, maybe a warning... or an informational message... but definitely an output - Verbatim quote from #debian, irc.freenode.net, Sat Jan 12 00:31:16 GMT 2008 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101128123953.gh3...@halon.org.uk
Re: Bug #566650: Please unblock dtc 0.32.2-1
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 10:47:54PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: As it stands, it's unreasonable to even try working on the 0.30.x branch for Squeeze, given the short amount of time remaining. I feel very sad about it, but as there's no way to convince the RT that the 0.32.x branch is in a very good shape for Squeeze (my users can tell it is...), I have to ask for the removal of src:dtc from testing. Please proceed if there's no way to change your mind about unblocking. I've had a look at the diff ( 425 files changed, 102770 insertions(+), 49242 deletions(-) ) ! and there's things in just the first few files that make this unsuitable for this stage of the freeze, and some worrying changes in general. Just picking through the file at complete random: - return Admin not found!; + return Admin $adm_login not found line .__LINE__. file .__FILE__; Would this lead to some information disclosure? dtc-0.30.20/admin/inc/dtc_config.php - huge set of changes, including a load of new features (Custom registration fields, a new radius implementation etc) dtc-0.32.5/admin/dtc_db.php and dtc-0.32.5/admin/dtc_import_all_dbs: looks like a load of changes to the database. A lot of: -form action=\.$_SERVER[PHP_SELF].\ method=\post\ +form action=\?\ method=\post\ Makes me wonder if this been through a search and replace tool. As this is such a small selection from what is a huge diff, I'm afraid I've gone with the suggestion and added the DTC removal hint. Neil -- pixie Ganneff is just a big cuddly teddy bear. pixie Our photo proves it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101108154847.gj4...@halon.org.uk
Re: Please unblock virtualbox-ose
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:35:03AM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: Neil, On Mon Oct 25, 2010 at 09:49:00 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: 3) Remove the package from squeeze did you had a look at it's r-depends? Removing is not an option. I should have probably made it more clear, those are the generic options we use, rather than what's being looked at specifically for virtualbox. Neil -- pixie hermanr_: I never studied german pixie I can just read some of it because it makes sense Tolimar . o O ( There is stuff Ganneff writes, which makes sense? ) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101026172842.gi4...@halon.org.uk
Re: Please unblock virtualbox-ose
Hi Michael, thanks for getting in touch. On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:40:50PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote: The only part of your email that I do not agree with is the part about removing. Yes, it's not easily possible, but I don't understand why this is even considered. Just on this point, the choices are to: 1) Update to the latest version 2) Leave the current version in squeeze (and add squeeze-ignore as required) 3) Remove the package from squeeze 4) Ask for backported fixes to address RC bugs. All are valid options from a Release Team POV, so that's where the consideration comes from. Hope this helps with the understanding, Neil -- * hermanr feels like a hedgehog having sex... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101025084900.ge4...@halon.org.uk
Re: Please unblock virtualbox-ose
Hi Bernd, On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 09:30:50AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Give it more time for testing in unstable then. That's one of the things that's being considered, if you'd carefully read the thread. Virtualbox is important enough to have the latest version of it in the next release. From someone's perspective, every package is important enough to have the latest version in the next release. Our job, unfortunately, is to ensure the stability of the release as a whole, not one particular package. Remember that the SC says something about doing the best for our users, Um... I don't think I can reply sensibly to this point. not being able to review every single patch. It is a bugfix release from upstream and not something which adds a lot of new features and the changes are well documented. I think we can both agree that there are a *lot* of new changes. You could at least have asked if there is away to get a reviable list of patches. Really a shame that Debian will ship with a large number of bugs in an important piece of software again. Again, I'm not going to be able to comment sensibly on this section. Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101025084419.gd4...@halon.org.uk
Re: Bug #566650: Please unblock dtc 0.32.2-1
- ask ftp masters for a removal of DTC in Squeeze, then I'll use backports.d.o (all my messages to this thread are to avoid this which would really make me sad for all the time of Squeeze until Wheezy...). If you guys stick to the above list, that's the only solution. We don't need to ask ftp masters here. It's just a matter of adding one line for Britney. Besides, please note that writing (many)long mails doesn't raise chances for an unblock. - allow a bit more than the above list, because version 0.30.x was never the target for Squeeze. Then, it should have been stopped from migrating or at least advertized as non-releasable in a bug report. -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 04:00:33AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: Hi Neil! First, I have listen to you in the this week in Debian podcast. It was fun. I wish I was living in Cambridge with 9 other DDs, I feel alone here in Shanghai (lucky, Li Daobing lives here now)! :) Neil McGovern wrote: Hi Thomas, Firstly, please accept my apologies for the lack of reply to your mail. As you can probably appreciate, there's a lot of work that the release team have to do. However, that doesn't mean you shoudn't have a mail back, so sorry. No worries, I do understand that the release team job is huge. :) What I understand less, is to not get answer *AND* get an unblock refusal *AND* a refusal to backport fixes though. Hrm. I seem to have message 4ca87e60.7000...@dogguy.org which indicates that there was indeed an answer, which was that we coudn't accept an upload through unstable, and backported fixes should go through t-p-u I believe that the previous discussions on this led to the conclusion that there is simply no way that the changes proposed could be reviewed. Was there actually a technical discussion? It's been now 3 months I'm asking for one! Let me try again this time, and see how it goes... I'm slightly confused by these dates, dtc 0.32.1-1 was uploaded on Sept 11, 2010. Your first mail about dtc dates back to Sept 12, 2010, so I can't see where the 3 months came from, especially since we've only been frozen for a couple of months :) I asked for authorization to have needed changes, particularly for removing some PHP_SELF clean-ups (keep in mind this is just an example), and in debian/control. I haven't started the backporting work because I am waiting for approval from the release team first. As above, I think we mentioned that backports should be preferred. My plan is to apply things like this: http://git.gplhost.com/gitweb/?p=dtc.git;a=commitdiff;h=1bbbd49d431b5427324133cea90ae21c89184afd Well, that's looks like it fixes a problem, but it doesn't look RC. and few other improvements (that I will have to review one by one in our Git). Some aren't RC per say, but I still don't feel comfortable leaving them in Squeeze (I didn't study the consequences of many fixes since I really didn't think this would be the outcome, and I think it would be a waste of time, when these fixes are known to be good improvements). There's at least one urgent critical issue (that I can't write here yet). Also, I need to change things in debian/control, because of changes between Lenny and Squeeze. Would that be accepted? It doesn't appear in the list above... Yet, for example, our support for NSSMySQL needs different packages (I would need to review each difference between the current Squeeze version and our Stable 0.32 that aimed at Squeeze). I am mentioning it, because I know it could be difficult to accept. We cannot accept or refuse without seeing a patch. So, please prepare a set of patches ready for review and send them. Please bear in mind though, that we're trying to release real soon now, so only directed fixes from the previous list should be worked on. Mehdi Dogguy wrote: Now, if you can show us what fixes you intend to backport, please go ahead. I'm here trying to understand what I'll be able to do or not, I don't really want to work for nothing. I guess nobody does, right? I'm not asking you to do some work for nothing. I'm asking for patches because that's what we review. We don't review technical fixes described in English only, sorry. Neil McGovern wrote: So in a way, yes. The size of the changeset is the reason it's being rejected. Please bear in mind the amount of emails we're getting to review diffs. Sure, but please understand. I never expected the RT to read the diff of 1 year of developments. I first thought I would have enough time to have 0.32 ready before the freeze, then before the tight freeze (I was 10 days late on that one). Now, because 0.30 wasn't aimed at Squeeze, we have a big issue. I wish to backport clean-ups and fixes, I am told that I can't, and that I can only make changes that you just mention below. Yet more are needed. Well, we certainly tell people that it's important
Re: Bug #566650: Please unblock dtc 0.32.2-1
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 09:25:52PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: Thomas Goirand wrote: Can we move forward and discuss what should be done now, rather than discussing the past? Thomas It's been more than 10 days, and I still have no answer to what I will be allowed to change/fix. Each time I've been asking things about DTC to the RT, is it normal that I had no reply for a long time, got answers, but not about the technical points I'm talking about or had refusal that I upload fixed versions (based only on the size of the differences and the fact I was late uploading)? That kind of result surprised me. Hi Thomas, Firstly, please accept my apologies for the lack of reply to your mail. As you can probably appreciate, there's a lot of work that the release team have to do. However, that doesn't mean you shoudn't have a mail back, so sorry. I believe that the previous discussions on this led to the conclusion that there is simply no way that the changes proposed could be reviewed. So in a way, yes. The size of the changeset is the reason it's being rejected. Please bear in mind the amount of emails we're getting to review diffs. Time is passing, and I still don't see the light at the end of this tunnel. Isn't it time for more constructive discussions? Having a release team aims at enhance Squeeze and make sure there's no bugs in what we ship for the Stable release. Please help me to reach this goal for this package too: I'm currently waiting for an answer so I can start back-porting fixes form our stable version! Ok, we're willing to accept changes that include the following only: - fixes for release critical bugs (i.e., bugs of severity critical, grave and serious) - changes for release goals, if they are not invasive; - translation updates - documentation fixes I hope this provides some clarity as to your request. Thanks, Neil -- No matter whether you use charcoal or pine-cones, you've got to ignite the fuel somehow. The traditional way is to use pieces of bark from a birch-tree. In the soviet era, we used Pravda, the newspaper of the Communist Party. Proprietary software licenses work just as well. http://tinyurl.com/yqnm58 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101015144954.gy19...@halon.org.uk
Re: Freeze exception for roxterm 1.18.5-3
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: Hi, Please could a freeze exception be made for roxterm 1.18.5-3 which fixes bug 598971. Although there are no reported symptoms in Debian the faulty code contributed to quite a serious problem in Ubuntu ie a terminal emulator failing to set TERM to something useful. And as the fix is very small I think the safer option is to include this new version in Squeeze. I'm not quite sure why you have changelog.in, and changelog, and they both have the same data in, but unblocked anyway. Neil -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? gpg key - http://www.halon.org.uk/pubkey.txt ; the.earth.li A40F862E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101012195155.gd19...@halon.org.uk
Release Team meeting minutes (and release update)
Hello, As previously announced[RT:PM], the Debian Release Team held a meeting on 2 and 3 Oct, 2010 in Paris, France. The meeting was kindly sponsored by IRILL[RT:PMS]. The attendees were Adam D. Barratt (adsb), Luk Claes (luk), Julien Cristau (jcristau), Mehdi Dogguy (mehdi), Philipp Kern (pkern) and Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw). Documentation = We improved the documentation related to Point Releases[CL:PR] and documented the procedure for Releases[CL:RE]. We also updated the Release Team wiki[RT:WI] page and we'll be adding more information in the upcoming weeks. Stable Updates and Volatile === We discussed how Volatile will evolve based on our experiences managing it. Considering the fact that there is nothing in volatile-sloppy for Lenny and that having a separate archive is painful, we would like to propose a plan for a new workflow for Squeeze: [ urgent-upload ] [ upload ] \ / | [ security ][ p-u-NEW ] (visualised by queue-viewer) | | accept | [ p-u ] -- autobuilding, users testing urgent uploads --/ | / | [ stable-updates ] | \ | point release[1] \ | [ stable ] [1] Point releases: include removals, updates ready to be cherry-picked from proposed-updates, but all updates from stable-updates are included. The Volatile Team and the Release Team share the same members, we would like to merge the Volatile Team into the Release Team and change the suite name to 'stable-updates'. The new dynamics allow maintainers to do only one upload instead of separate uploads to stable and volatile. The Release Team can then copy the package to the appropriate suite; if it is an urgent upload, it will be made available quickly to our users through stable-updates. During a point release, we will merge proposed-updates, security and stable-updates into the point release. We are planning to have a stable point release every two months and an oldstable point release evert four months in between two stable point releases. We would like to create a new list for users to receive announcements about new packages in stable-updates and requests for testing of packages in proposed-updates. The final name for this list has not yet been decided; the current suggestions include debian-stable-announce. Have a look at #598939. Release notes and upgrade reports = The release notes for Squeeze are progressing well and a call for translations will be made soon. This means that if you are aware of an issue that should be mentioned in the release notes, you need to make sure a bug is filed for it, preferrably with proposed wording, *now*. Once this has occurred, we will be encouraging the testing of new installs of Squeeze and upgrades from Lenny to Squeeze. As a result of these tests there will be a number of bug reports against the installation-reports and upgrade-reports pseudo-packages (dealing both with successful upgrades and problems with the process) which will need processing, categorising and reassigning to the affected packages. If you are interested in helping with this process, please contact us. Release Update (Squeeze Status) === Freeze Status (Unblock Policy) -- The Release Team would like to remind everybody that we are under deep freeze. We are updating the current unblock policy to get stricter rules: A new version may only contain changes falling in one of the following categories (compared to the version in testing): - fixes for release critical bugs (i.e., bugs of severity critical, grave and serious) in all packages; - changes for release goals, if they are not invasive; - translation updates - documentation fixes Please upload packages fitting this description to unstable, then request the freeze exception by filing a bug against release.debian.org. You don't need to include the full diff (which we re-generate from the uploaded packages anyway), but please include the relevant changelog entries. Transitions and removals All transitions are done and we do not plan any new transitions. Recently, the Release Team had to made some decisions between package upgrades and package removals. Please understand that when you say allow a new version or remove the old one, both options are valid from the Release Team's point of view and we may end up deciding in favour of the removal. Another important request: please, do not upload packages to t-p-u because you uploaded newer versions to unstable, always contact the Release Team. Bug Squashing Parties - The Release Team is still concerned about the number of release critical bugs affecting testing. We are still optimistic that
