Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-21 Thread Riley Baird
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:19:34 +0800 Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Riley Baird wrote: Kind of, but it's only for that one article. Is there something similar that lists all edits to the wiki itself like that? If not, I could make one by downloading the

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-17 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Riley Baird wrote: Kind of, but it's only for that one article. Is there something similar that lists all edits to the wiki itself like that? If not, I could make one by downloading the revision histories for all pages on the wiki and then parsing them, but

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-17 Thread Riley Baird
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:30:44 +0100 Tomas Pospisek t...@sourcepole.ch wrote: Am 13.02.2015 um 21:15 schrieb Riley Baird: On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:16:39 +0100 Tomas Pospisek t...@sourcepole.ch wrote: Am 12.02.2015 um 20:59 schrieb Riley Baird: Bug #388141 [RC] refers to the relicensing of

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-16 Thread Tomas Pospisek
Am 13.02.2015 um 21:15 schrieb Riley Baird: On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:16:39 +0100 Tomas Pospisek t...@sourcepole.ch wrote: Am 12.02.2015 um 20:59 schrieb Riley Baird: Bug #388141 [RC] refers to the relicensing of the debian www pages. After contacting debian-www, it seems that there isn't much

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-13 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On 2015-02-12 19:59, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this, would it be okay to mark it as jessie-ignore? For reference, as per

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-13 Thread Riley Baird
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:16:39 +0100 Tomas Pospisek t...@sourcepole.ch wrote: Am 12.02.2015 um 20:59 schrieb Riley Baird: Bug #388141 [RC] refers to the relicensing of the debian www pages. After contacting debian-www, it seems that there isn't much interest in fixing it. I interpret the

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-13 Thread Riley Baird
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 08:40:53 + Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On 2015-02-12 19:59, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-13 Thread Riley Baird
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:47:53 -0800 Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote: On Fri, 13 Feb 2015, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this,

Re: Should we mark #388141 as jessie-ignore?

2015-02-12 Thread Don Armstrong
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015, Riley Baird wrote: In any case, even if there is interest in closing this bug, it is definitely more of a long-term thing and is unlikely to be fixed before the jessie release. Because of this, would it be okay to mark it as jessie-ignore? There's no point in marking bugs