On Monday, 17 October 2016 8:53:30 PM AEDT László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> I'd a discussion with Dmitry and if I understood correctly, he no
> longer wants to be a close contributor - but I let him speak about his
> intentions.
I confirm that. I had terrible experience with Ceph and I do not wis
On Monday, 17 October 2016 9:34:35 PM AEDT Adrian Bunk wrote:
> It would also be OK if you would state that there is noone left active
> among the Ceph Maintainers, and that I can orphan the package for
> finding new maintainers.
I'm not going to maintain Ceph any more. I'm utterly disappointed in
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 03:30:31PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
> There are often distribution-specific issues that come in as bugs,[1]
> and you might be receiving bugs reported against 0.80.7 until the end
> of jessie LTS in 2020.
>...
Thinking more about it, it is not only bugs:
There are a
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:29:34AM +, James Page wrote:
> Hi Adrian
Hi James,
>...
> I'd like to continue maintaining Ceph in Debian; my time can be a little
> sporadic as it is with a number of maintainers, so doing this by myself is
> not a sustainable option so maybe a request for help is
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 02:05:23PM +0200, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
>
> Hi Adrian
Hi Gaudenz,
>...
> Regarding the maintainer adress I would like to keep it pointing to the
> ceph-maintainers mailinglist. I like the idea of working together with
> the other distro maintainers.
>...
does that actu
Hi Adrian
Thanks for the heads up. We were probably all a bit burried in work and
neglected ceph a bit too much.
James Page writes:
> Hi Adrian
>
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 at 20:34 Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> first of all thanks for your past work on Ceph.
>>
>> The current status of the Ce
Hi Adrian
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 at 20:34 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> first of all thanks for your past work on Ceph.
>
> The current status of the Ceph packages [1] does not look good.
>
> src:ceph has 3 RC bugs, from "maintainer address bounces"
> to "crashes since the latest NMU".
>
I'll sort
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> The current status of the Ceph packages [1] does not look good.
>
> src:ceph has 3 RC bugs, from "maintainer address bounces"
> to "crashes since the latest NMU".
I think (hope) that even if the sender get back a mail that the list
is mod
Hi,
first of all thanks for your past work on Ceph.
The current status of the Ceph packages [1] does not look good.
src:ceph has 3 RC bugs, from "maintainer address bounces"
to "crashes since the latest NMU".
If you still intend to maintain Ceph, do the emails from the BTS
actually reach you?
9 matches
Mail list logo
