-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
We are considering removing the following packages from testing as
they have unfixed RC bugs filed against them. The packages can be
found in the attached dd-list. The bugs that put them on this list
can be found in the removals file (also
Hello List,
does it make sense to establish a list of candidates for reintroduction to
testing ?
I have in mind packages that were discarded too quickly because
an easy to fix a RC appeared a some point while it was unofficially orphaned.
Jerome
On 30/10/12 14:32, Niels Thykier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:53:24PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
does it make sense to establish a list of candidates for reintroduction to
testing ?
Is this not something best managed on a case-by-case basis?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 30/10/12 17:36, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:53:24PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
does it make sense to establish a list of candidates for reintroduction to
testing ?
Is this not something best managed on a case-by-case basis?
my experience as potential sponsoree for
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:47:53 +0100
Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net wrote:
On 30/10/12 17:36, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:53:24PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
does it make sense to establish a list of candidates for reintroduction to
testing ?
Is this not something
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
Is this not something best managed on a case-by-case basis?
my experience as potential sponsoree for such a package answers me no
because
it is hard to get a sponsor.
If it fixes *only* rc bugs, then send a bug to sponsorship-requests.
I
6 matches
Mail list logo
