Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-15 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + pending On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 10:30 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 14-01-16 21:13, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > "1.8.47+nmu1+deb8u1~" (or +deb8u0 I guess) should work in practice > > afaict. > > > > Please go ahead. > > Uploaded with 1.8.47+nmu1+deb8u1~. Flagged for acceptance.

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-15 Thread Paul Gevers
On 14-01-16 21:13, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > "1.8.47+nmu1+deb8u1~" (or +deb8u0 I guess) should work in practice > afaict. > > Please go ahead. Uploaded with 1.8.47+nmu1+deb8u1~. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-14 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Sun, 2016-01-03 at 14:19 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > control: tags -1 moreinfo > > On 02-01-16 20:07, Paul Gevers wrote: > > Can be done. Let me work on a proposal. > > Please find attached my renewed proposal. I must admit that I didn't > know exactly how to expr

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-14 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 03-01-16 14:19, Paul Gevers wrote: > Please find attached my renewed proposal. I must admit that I didn't > know exactly how to express "greater than any version that is after the > largest wheezy point release". I suppose I could also just make that > version 1.8.47+nmu1+deb7u999" (with an

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-03 Thread Paul Gevers
control: tags -1 moreinfo On 02-01-16 20:07, Paul Gevers wrote: > Can be done. Let me work on a proposal. Please find attached my renewed proposal. I must admit that I didn't know exactly how to express "greater than any version that is after the largest wheezy point release". I suppose I could a

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-02 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 01-01-16 18:36, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > It looks like the fix for existing permissions isn't in the unstable > package? Correct. But it is in the NEW queue [1] for nearly two weeks. Because it doesn't seem to move there and because there are other issues in dbconfig-common that I worked o

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2016-01-01 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 11:54 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:02:11 +0100 Paul Gevers wrote: > > I will start to work on a proper debdiff, but I appreciate it to know if I > > should include the fixing of existing files in it. > > Due to lack of a res

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2015-12-14 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 21:39 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Ping... When are the next point releases coming up and how big is the > chance this is going to miss the boat? Not this year, or there'd have been an announcement already. Regards, Adam

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2015-12-14 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi On 04-12-15 11:54, Paul Gevers wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:02:11 +0100 Paul Gevers wrote: >> I will start to work on a proper debdiff, but I appreciate it to know if I >> should include the fixing of existing files in it. > > Due to lack of a response, which I expect is due to the lack of

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2015-12-04 Thread Paul Gevers
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:02:11 +0100 Paul Gevers wrote: > I will start to work on a proper debdiff, but I appreciate it to know if I > should include the fixing of existing files in it. Due to lack of a response, which I expect is due to the lack of a debdiff, I went ahead and fixed the permissions

Bug#806247: jessie-pu: package dbconfig-common/1.8.47+nmu3

2015-11-25 Thread Paul Gevers
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: jessie wheezy User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear Stable Release Managers, I come to you with this request after discussion with the security team. Because the issue I de