Thanks to all of you for your insights and experiences.
So I guess those lpr/lpd packages should stay within Debian and should be
maintained by the debian-printing team.
Thorsten
Hi everybody,
as you might have heard during the Debconf talk of Till, cups3 and CPDB
(Common Printing Dialog Backends) are waiting at the gates.
Maybe this is a good opportunity to get rid of some old legacy stuff. Is
there anybody or do you know anybody who is using the old BSD lpr/lpd
stuff
On Thu, 5 Jan 2023, Simon McVittie wrote:
3.
experimental packages appear in red on
https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html, which makes me wonder whether
that reflects those packages being de-prioritized, but perhaps I'm
reading too much into that?
Yes, you do. T
Hi Sean,
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018, Sean Whitton wrote:
I was making a more specific claim -- we don't and will never have the
manpower to provide security support for multiple different versions of
hundreds of little JavaScript libraries.
please have a look at for example CVE-2017-18077 [1] in the
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017, Bastien Roucaries wrote:
Will implement a lintian tag that will output statistics about not common
license.
It will help to add common license
yeah, that would be great.
Thorsten
Hi Jonas,
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Not quite sure what you suggest.
It looks like you suggest to duplicate the work of SPDX - see e.g.
https://github.com/spdx/license-list
no, it is much simpler. I just wanted to offer the license text in a
format that is immediately usa
Hi everybody,
manually working on debian/copyright can be nasty from time to time.
Would extending a service like:
curl http://licapi.debian.net/template
curl http://licapi.debian.net/template/lgpl3
with all those licenses not in /usr/share/common-licenses be of any help?
Thorsten
Hi Thomas and Ian,
thanks a lot for your kind words.
On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Thomas Goirand wrote:
However, after the deep freeze, we saw the queue getting bigger and
bigger. The graph for Jessie shows up to 600+ packages in the queue.
For good reasons the Release Team does not want to have pac
On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, Helmut Grohne wrote:
Dropping most of the Cc list as we move to general handling of similar
issues.
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:30:39PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
ISTM that in situations where Built-Using is arguably relevant, there
is also often a requirement to make sure
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Michael Gilbert wrote:
The problem is an undermanned ftpmaster team [0], so help there is
I have to object here. If I read something like:
please reject YYY
forgot to add the full MPL 2.0 text..
I wonder why this hadn't been checked before the upload.
If all maintaine
Hi Raphael,
On Fri, 27 Dec 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
What's unpredictable is that your package might be refused not for the
addition of the NEW binary but for because debian/copyright is not good
enough for current standards of the ftpmasters while it was ok at the time
it got accepted the fi
Hi David,
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, David Prévot wrote:
[1a] http://debian-med.alteholz.de/advent/
Thanks for your initiative, but I don't really feel comfortable with the
way you baptized it. Would it be possible to avoid religious-based
naming scheme?
in my opinion this Advent Calendar has rath
12 matches
Mail list logo
