On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:44:14PM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes!
Fixes yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
Uhh, or, not... Sorry,
Quoting =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgTHVpcyBUYWxsw7Nu?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
John Goerzen wrote:
JLTI was reprehended by Turbo Fredriksson due to the amount of
CPU wasted. He cared to contribute some patches which, after being
integrated and enhanced --as much as i could-- by me, form the current
build
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes! Fixes
yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
Uhh, or, not... Sorry, but the build system was terrible and is
certainly something which should not be encouraged.
I'd encourage you to look
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes! Fixes
yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
Uhh, or, not... Sorry, but the build system was terrible and is
certainly something which should
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes!
Fixes yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
Uhh, or, not... Sorry, but the build system
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes!
Fixes yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:35:57AM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
But regarding the build system, I REALLY object to any major changes! Fixes
yes,
but not REPLACEMENT!!
Well, it's a little late for that. ;-)
The first build system really sucked. It took AGES to build, and that
I have no
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:44:14PM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
Quoting Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Honestly, though, I'm much more concerned about maintainability than
speed of the build.
It's not especially problematic to maintain as it is now, and I ask you
to recognize the
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:29:55PM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
The ONLY problem with the current (partial) build system is that part of (!!)
the build is hardcoded. Where libs are, and the name of the MySQL/PgSQL libs
will rarely (if ever) change so this is not a PROBLEM, it's only a
* Turbo Fredriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
You keep saying that, without showing the problems. From what I can see,
all you say is it's wrong, it's very wrong and there's major problems
with it.
John pointed out the issues to it earlier in this thread, which you said
you had followed so I
José Luis Tallón [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hijacking a package without contacting the maintainer first is against
the Developers' Reference and can only be considered a personal attack.
I still don't know what is John Goerzen trying to achieve with this.
More on this later.
This thread is
Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
Hey, again, don't be so rude...
Being harsh is not the same as being rude.
some of those serious policy violations are things like mistakes
erasing logfiles and editing conffiles that couldn't be done in
another way.
Are you serious? There's no excuse, ever, for
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 03:05:17PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 01:09:11PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
The package has bugs, lots of them, and for that reason has been removed
from testing, well done, unstable it is here for that.
Uh no. I find it scary that you
Le vendredi 12 mai 2006 à 03:13 +0200, José Luis Tallón a écrit :
Please tell me how in hell can you justify accusing me of not testing my
packages, when you have obviously not done so.
You seem to have some fixation with uploading, don't you?? Six versions
in 24h ?
Instead of uploading many
John Goerzen wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 03:13:31AM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
Jose,
Before I comment on a few things, I want to make something clear to you.
You have repeatedly accused me of having something personal against you,
both in public and in private.
It definitively
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 12 mai 2006 à 03:13 +0200, José Luis Tallón a écrit :
Please tell me how in hell can you justify accusing me of not testing my
packages, when you have obviously not done so.
You seem to have some fixation with uploading, don't you?? Six versions
in 24h
* Riku Voipio ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 03:05:17PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 01:09:11PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
The package has bugs, lots of them, and for that reason has been removed
from testing, well done, unstable it is here
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would do this regardless of who the maintainer was. I seem to recall
possibly doing it for some Perl HTML package that was in a similar
situation to Bacula in the late 90s, but I can't really remember. I'm
sure you could dig up links.
It was the URI
On Tue, 9 May 2006 11:07:27, John Goerzen wrote:
: Hello,
:
: I intend to take over the Bacula package. I would first like to say
: thanks to Jose Luis Tallon for initially packaging it for Debian and
: maintaining it for these years.
:
: A brief history of why I intend to do this:
:
: *
Roberto Lumbreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Ok, the maintainer has not fixed the bugs, has not packaged the last
version of it in time, etc, but he has done a great job anyway, and I
still don't see the point of hijacking the package.
So he has done not one of the things expected of a
* Roberto Lumbreras ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I don't agree, all those things are not in my opinion enough for the
hijacking.
Thankfully, you're wrong.
The package has bugs, lots of them, and for that reason has been removed
from testing, well done, unstable it is here for that.
It's *not*
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 01:09:11PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
The package has bugs, lots of them, and for that reason has been removed
from testing, well done, unstable it is here for that.
Uh no. I find it scary that you share this same idea as the original
bacula maintainer. Unstable is
Roberto Lumbreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The package has bugs, lots of them, and for that reason has been removed
from testing, well done, unstable it is here for that.
No, it isn't. Maybe experimental is for that; but unstable is for
software that is targetted to be moved to etch and to be
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 01:09:11PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
rover, Jose Luis's sponsor and uploader of many of his packages including
bacula, you can blame me also if you want
Others have pretty well addressed the rest of your message already. I'd
like to expand on this point.
I've
:19 -0400
: From: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
: John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
: José Luis Tallón [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403
: Subject: Re: Intent to hijack Bacula
:
: * Roberto Lumbreras ([EMAIL
* Roberto Lumbreras ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Speaking about your mail, I think it's your opinion, mine is different.
Sure, but you're looking through some very rosy glasses.
Jose Luis doesn't want just his name in some place, he has worked a lot
in bacula in the past, and I don't know why
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:37:35AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
: * Roberto Lumbreras ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Speaking about your mail, I think it's your opinion, mine is different.
:
: Sure, but you're looking through some very rosy glasses.
hey, I've tried to be fair...
: Jose Luis
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 09:30:40PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
He has packaged the last version of bacula, and it is not uploaded
because it's not ready, then a new version was showed up... he has a
personal apt repository that users from bacula mailing list uses, and
packages (not yet
David Nusinow wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 09:30:40PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
He has packaged the last version of bacula, and it is not uploaded
because it's not ready, then a new version was showed up... he has a
personal apt repository that users from bacula mailing list uses,
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 23:07 +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
John has managed to not only update to the latest upstream version in his
upload, but he's also managed to fix 24 bugs by my count. It is notable
that he has managed to achieve so much while Jose struggled just to update
to the new
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Roberto Lumbreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Ok, the maintainer has not fixed the bugs, has not packaged the last
version of it in time, etc, but he has done a great job anyway, and I
still don't see the point of hijacking the package.
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:07:55PM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
[ snip ]
I have myself fixed in excess of 40 bugs in my packages in the last 48h,
when I have been back to speed.
So what???
I had already checked the packages you posted on sf.net and have not been able
to find bug fixes
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 09:30:40PM +0200, Roberto Lumbreras wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:37:35AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
: Jose Luis doesn't want just his name in some place, he has worked a lot
: in bacula in the past, and I don't know why he can't remain as
: maintainer or
Steve Langasek wrote:
It is the responsibility of a package maintainer to ensure that fixes for
bugs are uploaded in a timely manner. If José Luis isn't able to do this,
because he doesn't have a sponsor or for any other reason, then he is not an
effective maintainer for the package.
That
Stephen Frost wrote:
If the maintainer still wants to maintain it, help him, do NMUs, whatever,
but I'm still looking for one reason you can take over the package against
the maintainer's opinion.
He wants to have his name on the package w/o doing the work
(apparently).
What if I
* Jos? Luis Tall?n ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
Actually, we've heard in this thread that Stephen (his AM) *did* offer to
sponsor bacula uploads, and José Luis did not avail himself of this.
When the offer did come, I wasn't able to prepare the upload anyway.
I suspected
* Jos? Luis Tall?n ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
If the maintainer still wants to maintain it, help him, do NMUs, whatever,
but I'm still looking for one reason you can take over the package against
the maintainer's opinion.
He wants to have his name on the package w/o
John Goerzen wrote:
Hello,
I intend to take over the Bacula package. I would first like to say
thanks to Jose Luis Tallon for initially packaging it for Debian and
maintaining it for these years.
You have a funny sense of time, don't you?
This is true; Years. Since October 2003.
A brief
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 03:13:31AM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
Jose,
Before I comment on a few things, I want to make something clear to you.
You have repeatedly accused me of having something personal against you,
both in public and in private.
I cannot recall ever having even *heard* of
Gustavo Franco wrote:
[snip]
Thanks for this. I'm using backuppc at work and was considering to
move our backups to bacula after upgrading our current hardware setup.
Package updates and bug squashing in general was on the roadmap.
:-)
Bacula (specially 1.38.x is much better... hopefully
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:10:52PM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
I previously declined very 'consistent' offers to adopt/take over
Bacula, and offered co-maintenance instead.
One of the main reasons: i have quite good relations with upstream
(almost made them move main development to Debian
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:26:33AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:10:52PM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
I couldn't be happier if that happened. We have a bit less than 3 months
(until Etch freezes) to get all of this in shape. Any other volunteers?
I have not
On May 10, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should not go ahead and remove José from maintenance over his
objection if he offers you co-maintenance. Your reason for hijacking
bacula seems to have been that José was slacking, not anything personal
or some such. In that case, I can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
Except that he is not a developer and so far has not showed the minimal
competence required to maintain a package, nor attempts to improve his
procedures.
I also don't see how it matters: If José and John were Co-maintainers,
no other DD would sponsor
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:12:52PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I have not withdrawn my intent to take over Bacula. I am volunteering
to do some pretty significant work on it, and have already done so.
You should not go ahead and remove José from maintenance over his
objection if he
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:03:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
I also don't see how it matters: If José and John were Co-maintainers,
no other DD would sponsor José's uploads. In consequence, John would be
There is no guarantee of that. Somebody has been uploading these
packages all along, and
John Goerzen wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:12:52PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I have not withdrawn my intent to take over Bacula. I am volunteering
to do some pretty significant work on it, and have already done so.
You should not go ahead and remove José from maintenance
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:08:57PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:12:52PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I have not withdrawn my intent to take over Bacula. I am volunteering
to do some pretty significant work on it, and have already done so.
You should not go
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:53:23PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
developer like yourself in the team to help out and explain where and
why things are good or bad will surely help in the long run. In light of
that, and in light of his past contributions (good and, well, 'not as
good') which
On 5/10/06, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's just that I'm quite concerned about the precendent this creates. Up
until now, people have abandoned packages when other people felt the
packages in question where poorly maintained. I remember the case of the
Sometimes they have
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:37:34PM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote:
You should not go ahead and remove José from maintenance over his
objection if he offers you co-maintenance. Your reason for hijacking
bacula seems to have been that José was slacking, not anything personal
or some such. In
Marco d'Itri wrote:
On May 10, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should not go ahead and remove José from maintenance over his
objection if he offers you co-maintenance. Your reason for hijacking
bacula seems to have been that José was slacking, not anything personal
or some
Hello,
I intend to take over the Bacula package. I would first like to say
thanks to Jose Luis Tallon for initially packaging it for Debian and
maintaining it for these years.
A brief history of why I intend to do this:
* Bacula has had RC bugs open for more than a year. It was removed
On 5/9/06, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I intend to take over the Bacula package. I would first like to say
thanks to Jose Luis Tallon for initially packaging it for Debian and
maintaining it for these years.
(...)
Hi John,
Thanks for this. I'm using backuppc at work and was
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 11:07:27AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
I intend to take over the Bacula package.
Although hijacking generally feels mean I welcome your action here.
* Bacula has had RC bugs open for more than a year. It was removed
from testing several months ago because of this.
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 03:45:42PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for this. I'm using backuppc at work and was considering to
move our backups to bacula after upgrading our current hardware setup.
Package updates and bug squashing in general was on the roadmap.
That would be
56 matches
Mail list logo
