Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-24 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + pending On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 21:08 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 08:45 +0200, Tanguy Ortolo wrote: Julien Cristau, 2013-09-19 23:48+0200: The debdiff should be in this bug, please. Sorry, I thought I did it. Here it is. Thanks. In general

Processed: Re: Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-24 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: tags -1 + pending Bug #723798 [release.debian.org] pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4 Added tag(s) pending. -- 723798: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723798 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-23 Thread Tanguy Ortolo
package gajim fixed 693282 0.15.4-1 thanks Adam D. Barratt, 2013-09-19 23:08+0100: If http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=693282#50 is correct and the bug is already fixed in unstable, please also add an appropriate fixed version. Indeed. I have just checked, the changes that fix

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-23 Thread Tanguy Ortolo
Cyril Brulebois, 2013-09-23 05:14+0200: Also, one can wonder why urgency is high for an upload prepared in april, and not going through security channels. I was not maintaining this package at that time, and I just took the proposed NMU, thinking that urgency was relevant. If it is not, I can

Processed: Re: Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-23 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: tags -1 + confirmed Bug #723798 [release.debian.org] pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4 Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 723798: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723798 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-22 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk (2013-09-19): If http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=693282#50 is correct and the bug is already fixed in unstable, please also add an appropriate fixed version. Ping? Also, one can wonder why urgency is high for an upload prepared in

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-20 Thread Tanguy Ortolo
Julien Cristau, 2013-09-19 23:48+0200: The debdiff should be in this bug, please. Sorry, I thought I did it. Here it is. -- ,--. : /` ) Tanguy Ortolo xmpp:tan...@ortolo.eu | `-'Debian Developer irc://irc.oftc.net/Tanguy \_ diff -u gajim-0.15.1/debian/changelog

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-19 Thread Tanguy Ortolo
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, The version of gajim currently in stable, 0.15.1-4, has a security bug, CVE-2012-5524 / Debian #693282. corsac has prepared an NMU for

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-19 Thread Julien Cristau
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 23:32:03 +0200, Tanguy Ortolo wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hello, The version of gajim currently in stable, 0.15.1-4, has a security bug, CVE-2012-5524 / Debian #693282. corsac has

Bug#723798: pu: package gajim/0.15.1-4

2013-09-19 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, 2013-09-19 at 23:48 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 23:32:03 +0200, Tanguy Ortolo wrote: The version of gajim currently in stable, 0.15.1-4, has a security bug, CVE-2012-5524 / Debian #693282. corsac has prepared an NMU for that, and I was suggested to upload