Bug#897277: decrease e2fsprogs' Priority: required

2023-12-12 Thread Faidon Liambotis
Hi Ted, On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 01:41:36AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > I haven't received a response for this. We are now at the beginning of > the aforementioned bookworm cycle, so I thought it may be a good > opportunity to bump this :) Do you have any thoughts? It's now been 2½ years

Bug#897277: decrease e2fsprogs' Priority: required

2022-12-20 Thread Bastian Germann
On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:41:36 +0300 Faidon Liambotis wrote: I haven't received a response for this. We are now at the beginning of the aforementioned bookworm cycle, so I thought it may be a good opportunity to bump this :) Do you have any thoughts? We are now shortly before the freeze and

Bug#897277: decrease e2fsprogs' Priority: required

2021-08-17 Thread Faidon Liambotis
Hi! On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:48:25AM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 08:42:16AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > So what I am currently thinking might be a viable first step is to > > split out the translations for e2fsprogs and transition from > > Essential: yes to

Bug#897277: decrease e2fsprogs' Priority: required

2021-01-10 Thread Faidon Liambotis
Hi Ted, On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 08:42:16AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > So what I am currently thinking might be a viable first step is to > split out the translations for e2fsprogs and transition from > Essential: yes to Essential: no, since there is no controversy over > that step. We can