Re: Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

2009-07-25 Thread Russ Allbery
Andreas Barth writes: > So, I can see three different ways to continue. In any case a. and c. > should be fixed if the package is allowed into Debian. > > 1. Allow qmail to go into Debian (including squeeze). > > 2. Allow qmail into Debian unstable, but prevent it (at least for now) > from enteri

Bug#422139: init script for git-daemon (summary; possible action)

2009-07-25 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Sat, Jul 25 2009, Don Armstrong wrote: > Just to summarize what I understand to be the current status of this > bug: > > 1) git-daemon-run currently does not provide a sys-v init script > because it is designed to be run by runit; no existing package > provides a sys-v init script for git-daemo

Re: Bug#422139: init script for git-daemon (summary; possible action)

2009-07-25 Thread Andreas Barth
* Don Armstrong (d...@debian.org) [090725 16:09]: > Since #2 is at most what the committee could decide to do, there's no > decision for the technical committee to make regarding this bug. > > Thus, I suggest that this issue be reassigned to git-daemon, tagged > with wontfix and help, and Aurélien

Re: Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

2009-07-25 Thread Andreas Barth
Hi, trying to summarize the discussion, there are a few technical issues: a. By far most important is the topic of delayed bounces. Gerit offered to change the default to not produce them. b. There are lots of issues why qmail doesn't look too competitive, like the static user ids, ignorance of

Bug#422139: init script for git-daemon (summary; possible action)

2009-07-25 Thread Russ Allbery
Don Armstrong writes: > Just to summarize what I understand to be the current status of this > bug: > > 1) git-daemon-run currently does not provide a sys-v init script > because it is designed to be run by runit; no existing package > provides a sys-v init script for git-daemon. > > 2) Gerrit Pa

Bug#422139: init script for git-daemon (summary; possible action)

2009-07-25 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 07:05 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > Does anyone have any objections or suggestions? I concur. Bdale -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#439006: bug cleanup

2009-07-25 Thread Andreas Barth
close 439006 thanks I'm closing this bug report as "expired". There is no decision to overwrite, no patch to accept, so we cannot do anything else. In case there is a current issue with accepting patches into kernel, please include in any mail the patches that were sent to the debian kernel list

Processed: bug cleanup

2009-07-25 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 439006 Bug#439006: tech-ctte: Efika and sony PS3 patches in linux-2.6 'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing. Bug closed, send any further explanations to Sven Luther > thanks Stopping processing here. Ple

Re: Call for votes (was: Bug#484841: staff group root equivalence)

2009-07-25 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 18:55 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > Hi, > > I'm calling on votes now for these three options (the last one isn't a > proposal, but by default in the option set). According to the > consitution, the voting periode last for up to one week, or until the > outcome is no longer in

Bug#422139: init script for git-daemon (summary; possible action)

2009-07-25 Thread Don Armstrong
Just to summarize what I understand to be the current status of this bug: 1) git-daemon-run currently does not provide a sys-v init script because it is designed to be run by runit; no existing package provides a sys-v init script for git-daemon. 2) Gerrit Pape is willing to apply a patch to git-

Bug#484841: Call for votes

2009-07-25 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Fri, Jul 24 2009, Andreas Barth wrote: > Hi, > > I'm calling on votes now for these three options (the last one isn't a > proposal, but by default in the option set). According to the > consitution, the voting periode last for up to one week, or until the > outcome is no longer in doubt. > > |

Bug#429671: exim4 username

2009-07-25 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Marc Haber wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 08:50:46AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > (and Marc can provide his counterpart) > > We would appreciate, however, if people would aid in getting the > standardization process under way as soon as possible. This needs to > be in p

Bug#504516: marked as done (/usr/local/lib is writable by group staff and in default search path)

2009-07-25 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:20:30 -0700 with message-id <20090725132030.gv12...@volo.donarmstrong.com> and subject line Re: Call for votes (was: Bug#484841: staff group root equivalence) has caused the Debian Bug report #484841, regarding /usr/local/lib is writable by group staff and i

Processed (with 1 errors): Re: Call for votes (was: Bug#484841: staff group root equivalence)

2009-07-25 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > unmerge 504516 Bug#504516: /usr/local/lib is writable by group staff and in default search path Bug#484841: Should /usr/local be writable by group staff? Disconnected #504516 from all other report(s). > clone 484841 -1 Bug#484841: Should /usr/loc

Bug#484841: marked as done (Should /usr/local be writable by group staff?)

2009-07-25 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:20:30 -0700 with message-id <20090725132030.gv12...@volo.donarmstrong.com> and subject line Re: Call for votes (was: Bug#484841: staff group root equivalence) has caused the Debian Bug report #484841, regarding Should /usr/local be writable by group staff? t

Re: Call for votes (was: Bug#484841: staff group root equivalence)

2009-07-25 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:55:01PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > I'm calling on votes now for these three options (the last one isn't a > proposal, but by default in the option set). According to the > consitution, the voting periode last for up to one week, or until the > outcome is no longer in