Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The ffmpeg library in debian is a problem case and probably should not
be in there. That issue hasn't been decided yet and till then anything
using it stays stuck.
Really? Excellent then. I would expect that gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg,
recently uploaded, to
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:21:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 03:56:30PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 03:56:30PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
sorry, I was remembering incorrectly the dates
(and by no means meaning that I want the release to be 3 months later
than what Steve announced)
a.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:52AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
I *guess* mplayer could do likewise.
MPlayer was once very picky regarding the versions of ffmpeg that it
does compile with. Moreover MPlayer want to link all core libraries
together
Dear Jeroen and everybody,
here attached is an email I sent in September.
Yes, I did ask to ftp-masters clarifications about your proposal in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg00997.html
and never received a reply.
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
While you indeed haven't got a later
actually, there was a response in Aug 2004, as in attachment
A Mennucc wrote:
The oldest upload of 'mplayer' that I still find in my harddisk was
'Wed Jul 23 10:44:54 2003' (see attachment)
So 'mplayer' has been waiting in NEW queue for some response from
ftp-masters for 876 days (at
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:22:33AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
Dear Jeroen and everybody,
here attached is an email I sent in September.
Yes, I did ask to ftp-masters clarifications about your proposal in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg00997.html
and never received a reply.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 03:03:54PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
2) (if yes) do we need to remove MPEG decoding stuff?
Unsure, as I explained above and in earlier mails. It's a very difficult
question, and we don't have an answer on it yet.
It would be really helpful if someone would
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A simple assurance that your package will be rejected from the NEW queue
if no ftp-master approves it within 2 weeks would actually be a benefit.
Why?
It seems like, if that's the way that you want the world to work, you
could already just pretend that
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 04:34:54PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:30:15AM +, David Pashley wrote:
On Dec 14, 2005 at 00:25, Anand Kumria praised the llamas by saying:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A simple assurance that your package will be rejected from the NEW queue
if no ftp-master approves it within 2 weeks would actually be a benefit.
Why?
It seems like, if that's the way that you want the world to
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A simple assurance that your package will be rejected from the NEW queue
if no ftp-master approves it within 2 weeks would actually be a benefit.
Why?
It seems like,
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A simple assurance that your package will be rejected from the NEW queue
if no ftp-master approves it within 2 weeks would
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
I explicitely said that stripping it
anyway will make the whole pondering on whether it can be in the
(source) package at all moot for the question whether mpeg encoding
would be legal to ship on ftp.debian.org. To the best of my knowledge,
mpeg encoding stuff is
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:30:15AM +, David Pashley wrote:
On Dec 14, 2005 at 00:25, Anand Kumria praised the llamas by saying:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:30:15AM +, David Pashley wrote:
5.5 hours for a package to make it through NEW. I think you owe some
people an apology.
- 8126 T Oct 25 Debian Installe ( 46) xmovie_1.9.13-0_i386.changes is N=
EW
10552 T Dec 14
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 03:56:30PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think
Hi,
On Thursday 15 December 2005 18:06, A Mennucc wrote:
In my opinion, considering that the release of etch is 15 months away,
Please don't consider this :)
No matter whether it's a lack of knowledge or disbelieving in the etch release
plan (a la it's scheduled for december so it will become
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are too busy for Debian.
I must
Russ Allbery wrote:
Assuming that what you say above is correct and FFMPEG is the only issue
(and I have no reason to doubt you),
And if it's not, it would be really nice if the ftpmasters let someone know.
I agree that xvidcap and ffmpeg
should be treated the same. However, that is not
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it would be nice if the reasons for long-standing packages
hanging around in the NEW queue were documented publicly, but I do
think in these cases the maintainers actually know the reasons.
Well, you're right in the case of Christian Marillat
[Thaddeus H. Black]
3. If James' imperial rules are unacceptable to us, then the
alternative is to change the person in James' position. It has
been years since any other option was credible. We all know
this. This means dismissing James from his fortified posts of
Anand Kumria wrote:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are too busy for Debian.
I must say that I am
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:52AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
That would have been me:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg00997.html
at that time, you wrote/
/
/So, adding these two tentative conclusions together, it seems
likely that if
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume the DPL has been working in the background to try to resolve
this, as an public and open power struggle between the DPL and the
people in key privileged positions would soon become very ugly, and
affect the Debian project badly. How
hi
I think that both sides are right:
1) people who express kudos to FTP-masters for express accepting new
packages due to the C++ name transitions
2) Anand Kumria and Thaddeus Black criticizing FTP-masters for never
addressing 'mplayer' 'xvidcap' 'rte' and such
I can understand why nobody
On 12/15/05, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there is a serious risk that these people would so blatantly
disregard our constitution
That certainly seems to be the case, judging from the discussion that
followed Bdale's Structural Evolution Debconf5 talk[1] - here's a
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:52AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
But it is not doing a great job with processing a few old uploads. I
consider it a problem that no decision have been taken on the few
really old uploads (xvidcap, rte, mplayer).
One of the
A Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) people who express kudos to FTP-masters for express accepting new
packages due to the C++ name transitions
2) Anand Kumria and Thaddeus Black criticizing FTP-masters for never
addressing 'mplayer' 'xvidcap' 'rte' and such
Once again, I think these
A Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BTW: I know that 'mplayer' has always been fishy business in Debian
but what did 'xvidcap' ever do wrong? AFAICT the only problem may be
that 'xvidcap' contains FFMPEG code ; but FFMPEG has been in Debian for
quite long now, so I do not really
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 05:08:07PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
When one doesn't know, the right thing to do is frequently both not make
the problem worse and not overreact, meaning leaving ffmpeg in the archive
and xvidcap in NEW until the situation is clearly understood and resolved
is quite
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 05:54:34PM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:52AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
That would have been me:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg00997.html
at that time, you wrote/
/
/So,
On 12/14/05, Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1]: As I write this 79 NEW packages, 85 total.
With only four entries more than a month old I think it's doing fine,
especially compared to other maintainers/teams that have bugs open
months or years.
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:25:03 +1100, Anand Kumria
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
Acknowledged. Debian might have problems, but NEW queue processing
surely isn't one of them (any
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:40:09AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
As this post indicates, it isn't just the ftp-master team failing Debian.
Yeah, some Debian Developers suck a lot.
Hm. The ftp-team is quite good in comparision, I'd say.
Marc
--
BOFH #208:
Your mail is being routed through Germany ... and they're
On Wed, December 14, 2005 09:42, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
So, who knows. Not that xvidcap is critical for me, but it is somewhat
annoying to have it sitting there for no (declared) reason.
While I generally agree with the other posters that NEW queue handling is
going very well, I
On Dec 14, 2005 at 00:25, Anand Kumria praised the llamas by saying:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are
[Marc Haber]
Acknowledged. Debian might have problems, but NEW queue processing
surely isn't one of them (any more).
I agree that the NEW processing is working quite well these days, and
is no longer the source of much frustration in debian. The
ftp-masters are doing a great job processing
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
But it is not doing a great job with processing a few old uploads. I
consider it a problem that no decision have been taken on the few
really old uploads (xvidcap, rte, mplayer).
One of the FTP masters (I forgot who) once said that the best way to
help get mplayer
Yes, ftpmaster is getting efficient at the routine processing. Congrats!
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
But it is not doing a great job with processing a few old uploads. I
consider it a problem that no decision have been taken on the few
really old uploads (xvidcap,
On 12/14/05, Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Likewise for mozilla-firefox-adblock (2 months), new version of tidy (1
month), xplc (1 month), cvsconnect (1 month), cvssuck (1 month), libmpd (1
month); if there's something wrong with each of these packages, the
packager should know by
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 13:35 +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 12/14/05, Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Likewise for mozilla-firefox-adblock (2 months), new version of tidy (1
month), xplc (1 month), cvsconnect (1 month), cvssuck (1 month), libmpd (1
month); if there's
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
My proposal would be exactly like that: extend the NEW queue
information page with a comments field where FTP-master can add any
comments for packages that aren't approved or rejected when first
examined. It would just have to contain a quick note about the
problems and
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 14:27 +0100, Amaya wrote:
Every ITP opens a bug, every upload stalled in NEW should close it.
No need to extend anything, the BTS is where these comments belong,
IMHO.
Packages can end up in NEW for other reasons, but for the cases that are
currently the hot topic, that
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:52AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
But it is not doing a great job with processing a few old uploads. I
consider it a problem that no decision have been taken on the few
really old uploads (xvidcap, rte, mplayer).
One of the
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
I don't really care that much how it's implemented, as long as status
updates are given.
Sure :)
--
.''`. Follow the white Rabbit - Ranty (and Lewis Carroll)
: :' :
`. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux
`- www.amayita.com
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
If there are still open problems, the best thing would
be to communicate them as clearly as possible.
If James Troup and Ryan Murray have made one thing
abundantly clear, it is this: as a general rule, they
will not communicate. Not clearly, not consistently,
not but
Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In my entire involvement with Debian from the development side, I've never
seen the NEW queue being processed as quickly as it is these days. It used to
be irritating to me -- it isn't today.
I have the same feeling. I would rather give
Thaddeus H. Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3. If James' imperial rules are unacceptable to
us, then the alternative is to change the person
in James' position. It has been years since any
other option was credible. We all know this.
This means dismissing James from
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are too busy for Debian.
I must say that I am particularly impressed that
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are too
[Anand Kumria's sarcastic criticism of the ftp-master team removed]
On the contrary, it seems to me that the ftp-master team is doing a
fantastic job and has been for many months. They have stayed on top
of the flurry of NEW packages generated by two series of library
renames from two separate
* Anand Kumria [Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:25:03 +1100]:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
Agreed. Thanks, Anand, for reflecting the feeling of (I believe) most
developers in the project with such a short
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
I'd like to congratulate our ftp-master team on their ability to timely
process packages progressing through the NEW queue.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [1]
I think you are an excellent example of people who are
Steinar H Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know the details of the three longest-running packages, but I
assume you asked an ftpmaster about those?
Patent issues around video codecs, discussed on debian-devel ad nauseam
over the past few years. It would be nice to eventually get
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:00:09AM +0100, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
Strange, 4 NEW packages processed in less than a week for me. I think it
is fast and not irritating.
So, i really congratulate ftpmaster team.
AOL.
Moreover, they really show interest in what is being uploaded and they
care
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
[1]: As I write this 79 NEW packages, 85 total.
Then ftp-master must be really busy, since it's now 64, total 69.
Also note that most of those packages in new aren't even a week
in it, alot aren't even a day old.
I think they're
59 matches
Mail list logo
