Bug#846002: blends-tasks must be priority:standard and not make a mess out of tasksel menu

Hi, first, you've made the point that you were hoping the TC would help the blends team and the d-i team work together. I think that Phil's suggestions for a technical approach are quite good, and I hope that will move forward in the buster cycle. With regard to stretch, I honestly don't think

Bug#846002: Call for votes on resolution for #846002 (blends-tasks)

I vote A -> FD for the blends-tasks vote. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#846002: blends-tasks must be priority:standard and not make a mess out of tasksel menu

Since I've been asked in an IRC query whether I might be willing to consider this suggestion: Philip Hands (2017-02-03): > I think this is in part a symptom of mixing up multiple questions in > one request. > > There seems to be a consensus that the priority change was

Bug#846002: Call for votes on resolution for #846002 (blends-tasks)

Margarita Manterola writes: > I call for votes on the following resolution with regards to #846002: > > RESOLUTION > > Background > > The blends-tasks package was uploaded in April 2016 setting its priority to > important. The result of this change was that the

Bug#846002: blends-tasks must be priority:standard and not make a mess out of tasksel menu

Ole Streicher writes: ... >>> The TC has the power to decide here, and you were asked to do so. If you >>> think that d-i took the right decision, you should decide so (and then >>> you don't need to use your power), but not just let them decide. >> >> That's what the

Bug#846002: blends-tasks must be priority:standard and not make a mess out of tasksel menu

Hi Tollef, On 02.02.2017 21:29, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Ole Streicher Am 31.01.2017 um 16:26 schrieb Sam Hartman: > If they don't want to do that for stretch, that's a decision within > their pervue that we clearly don't have the votes to override. >> I have read Sams "vote to