-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 19/07/12 21:30, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 07:27:01PM +, Bart Martens wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 04:57:44PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-request
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 07:27:01PM +, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 04:57:44PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;ordering=wheezy-bilevel
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-request
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 04:57:44PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;ordering=wheezy-bilevel
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;ordering=wheezy-view
> http://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/BTS#Usertags
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 19/07/12 15:15, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usercategory
> wheezy-status * Wheezy Status [tag=] + Intended for Wheezy
> [for-wheezy] + Not Intended for Wheezy [not-for-wheezy] + Fit for
> Wheezy [fit-f
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:09:20PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Le 18/07/12 15:42, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 02:31:16PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote: Le
> > 16/07/12 11:05, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> Le 03/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 18/07/12 15:42, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 02:31:16PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote: Le
> 16/07/12 11:05, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
Le 03/07/12 08:20, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 02:31:16PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Le 16/07/12 11:05, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> > Le 03/07/12 08:20, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> >> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit : Hi,
> >
> >> We could agree on a u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 16/07/12 11:05, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> Le 03/07/12 08:20, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
>> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit : Hi,
>
>> We could agree on a usertag then, for instance:
>
>> User: sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org U
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 03/07/12 08:20, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit : Hi,
>
> We could agree on a usertag then, for instance:
>
> User: sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org Usertags:
> not-for-wheezy
>
> Using sponsorship-r
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 08:20:20AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> > On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:06:25AM -0600, Paul Wise wrote:
> >> Perhaps use wheezy-ignore for stuff that shouldn't be in wheezy?
> >
> > Isn't that completely contrary to that tag's us
Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:06:25AM -0600, Paul Wise wrote:
>> Perhaps use wheezy-ignore for stuff that shouldn't be in wheezy?
>
> Isn't that completely contrary to that tag's usual meaning?
>
> You set it for stuff that should be in wheezy despite the
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:06:25AM -0600, Paul Wise wrote:
> Perhaps use wheezy-ignore for stuff that shouldn't be in wheezy?
Isn't that completely contrary to that tag's usual meaning?
You set it for stuff that should be in wheezy despite the bug.
What we'd want here, is some way to convey "do
Hi,
On 02.07.2012 17:06, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Bart Martens wrote:
>
>> Comments on these suggestions ?
>
> Perhaps use wheezy-ignore for stuff that shouldn't be in wheezy? I
> guess that might be stepping on the release team's tags, so maybe
> setting up usercatego
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Bart Martens wrote:
> Comments on these suggestions ?
Perhaps use wheezy-ignore for stuff that shouldn't be in wheezy? I
guess that might be stepping on the release team's tags, so maybe
setting up usercategories and usertags for the sponsorship-requests
metapacka
Hello,
Now that the freeze period has started, some of the open requests for
sponsorship are now invalid because the packages don't conform to the freeze
policy.
http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html
With "open requests for sponsorship" I mean not only the RFS bugs but also the
pack
15 matches
Mail list logo