On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 20:12:13 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 17:45:11 +0200, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
>
> > Could you please binNMU the following packages:
> >
> > nmu bibledit_4.0-1 gmpc-plugins_0.20.0-1 kazehakase_0.5.8-4 surf_0.4.1-4
> > swt-gtk_3.7-2 uzbl_0.0.0~g
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 17:45:11 +0200, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Could you please binNMU the following packages:
>
> nmu bibledit_4.0-1 gmpc-plugins_0.20.0-1 kazehakase_0.5.8-4 surf_0.4.1-4
> swt-gtk_3.7-2 uzbl_0.0.0~git.20110412-1 webkit-image_0.0.svn25399-2
> xtrkcad_1:4.0.2-2 yelp_2.30.1+
Le Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:53:22 +0200,
Laurent Bigonville a écrit :
Hi,
Webkitgtk+ has now migrated to testing, I guess can go on with this
transition.
Could you please binNMU the following packages:
nmu bibledit_4.0-1 gmpc-plugins_0.20.0-1 kazehakase_0.5.8-4 surf_0.4.1-4
swt-gtk_3.7-2 uzbl_0.0.0
Hi,
Could you please schedule binNMU for the webkit 1.3 transition:
nmu banshee_2.0.1-3 bibledit_4.0-1 gimp_2.6.11-3 gmpc-plugins_0.20.0-1
kazehakase_0.5.8-4 lekhonee-gnome_0.11-1 miro_4.0.2-1 shotwell_0.9.3-1
surf_0.4.1-4 swt-gtk_3.7-2 uzbl_0.0.0~git.20110412-1
webkit-image_0.0.svn25399-2 xtr
Hi,
libwebkit-dev has been added back in 1.4.2-2 webkitgtk+ upload and it's
now a dummy package that depends against the new libwebkitgtk-dev
package.
Could a binNMU be scheduled for the packages that have not yet adjusted
their build depdendencies yet? A BD-wait should be set for libwebkit-dev
(
Hi,
I've opened the bugs to asked the maintainer to update the
build-dependency:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=webkit1.3_transition;users=pkg-webkit-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Laurent Bigonville
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.o
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 15:20 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable. What
> > this involves:
>
> How about changing the source package name at the same time? This would
> save a lot of the trouble, and the devel
Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable. What
> this involves:
How about changing the source package name at the same time? This would
save a lot of the trouble, and the development package names are changing
anyway.
Were doing that for most GT
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Those are leafy gnome apps. I wonder if there is any real harm in
> holding them back for a while?
Yes.
Please stop this.
You're on the wrong track if you want to have a more secure testing by
blocking new versions from entering. For me CUT is about
Hi.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 09:05:06AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Right. Are you deliberately trying to stall all development, or does
> > it just appear that way?
>
> I fail to see how proposing a more measured approach to testing
> security for two very problemati
Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 09:05:06AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > > Right. Are you deliberately trying to stall all development, or does
> > > it just appear that way?
> >
> > I fail to see how proposing a more measured approach to test
Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > > On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > >> I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable.
> > What
> > > >> this involves:
> > > >
> > > > I would prefer to stick with 1.2.x for the time being
> > >
> > > Until when?
> >
> > Sometime
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:41:15AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> >Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> >
> >> On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> >> > Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Package: release.debian.org
> >> >> Severity: normal
> >> >> User: release.debi
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:41:15AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>
>> On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> > Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
>> >
>> >> Package: release.debian.org
>> >> Severity: normal
>> >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
>> >> Usertags
> > On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > >> I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable.
> What
> > >> this involves:
> > >
> > > I would prefer to stick with 1.2.x for the time being
> >
> > Until when?
>
> Sometime between December this year and Feb 2012 (or until
Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> >
> >> Package: release.debian.org
> >> Severity: normal
> >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> >> Usertags: transition
> >>
> >> I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to
On 04/13/2011 01:40 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable. What
this involves:
I would prefer to stick
Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable. What
> this involves:
I would prefer to stick with 1.2.x for the time being since
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
I plan to upload webkit 1.3.x (soon to be 1.4.0) to unstable. What
this involves:
webkit now provides two parallel-installable libraries:
libwebkitgtk-1.0-0 and libwebkitgtk-3.0-0; the f
19 matches
Mail list logo
