Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?
On 2015-02-12 19:59, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this, would it be okay to mark it as jessie-ignore? For reference, as per https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#tags , setting -ignore tags is the purview of the Release Team, not maintainers or debian-devel. Feel free to suggest such things, but please don't add or remove any -ignore tags. Thanks, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2b869354c1753b4c7b41345a0aee7...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:16:39 +0100 Tomas Pospisek t...@sourcepole.ch wrote: Am 12.02.2015 um 20:59 schrieb Riley Baird: Bug #388141 [RC] refers to the relicensing of the debian www pages. After contacting debian-www, it seems that there isn't much interest in fixing it. I interpret the relative silence in #388141 differently then you. I'd say that everybody is busy with doing other stuff. So if you want the state of affairs to change, just go after it, bit by bit. As you describe here: The next step would involve compiling a list of website lines which are still active yet which relicensing permission has not been received. And then just ask for permission, line by line. Surprisingly not! Everyone who has been contacted has already been contacted. The reason for collecting these lines is that we need to determine whether the lines in question are copyrightable, and whether they are still in use. In the end I think it's work and if it should be accomplished then someone has to do that work. Since you are interested, just go and hit the work, it may well be that people will join or help you along the way. I've always been happy to do the work, but I thought that access to the wiki databases was necessary to compile such a list. Or is it possible to compile such a list with just a user account on the wiki? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150214071524.fd5a9f473b50c52df74f6...@bitmessage.ch
Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:40:53 + Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On 2015-02-12 19:59, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this, would it be okay to mark it as jessie-ignore? For reference, as per https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#tags , setting -ignore tags is the purview of the Release Team, not maintainers or debian-devel. Feel free to suggest such things, but please don't add or remove any -ignore tags. I won't. Thanks for letting me know. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150214070436.759e1add961d8bbd3ea14...@bitmessage.ch
Fw: Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:47:53 -0800 Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote: On Fri, 13 Feb 2015, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this, would it be okay to mark it as jessie-ignore? There's no point in marking bugs in psuedo packages jessie-ignore; they're ignored for the purpose of releasing jessie anyway. Ah, I didn't know that. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150214070717.d4b967eb7518ad257f667...@bitmessage.ch
