Bug#711773: pu: package munin/2.0.6-4+deb7u1

Hi Adam, On Sonntag, 9. Juni 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > It is very late, indeed. Given the small size of the diff, I've decided > to accept it in any case; hopefully that turns out okay... Thanks! cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#713049: pu: gosa - fix mass import of users in wheezy

Hi, On Samstag, 22. Juni 2013, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > Here is a request to approve an upload of gosa to wheezy, to fix a bug > Debian Edu need to have fixed in our Debian Edu Wheezy release. The > same fix was uploaded as versoin 2.7.4-4.3 to unstable with this > changelog entry: > >*

Bug#713049: pu: gosa - fix mass import of users in wheezy

Hi Adam, you've only asked about this On Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Out of interest, do we know how long ago the functionality was > "temporarily disabled"? which Pere answered. gosa 2.7.4-4.3 (the version from this very bugreport) is now available in jessie and has als

Bug#713049: pu: gosa - fix mass import of users in wheezy

Hi Adam, On Donnerstag, 11. Juli 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Okay, thanks; please go ahead. thanks, uploaded! Changes: gosa (2.7.4-4.3~deb7u1) stable-updates; urgency=low . * Upload to stable updates. . gosa (2.7.4-4.3) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload. * debian/

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing

Hi Geoff, On Dienstag, 3. September 2013, Geoff Levand wrote: > I maintain Linux on the Sony Playstation 3 (powerpc). Currently the > only distro I support is Debian, so in doing that I do general testing could you comment (again) on #619236, please?! cheers, Holger signature.asc Des

Proposed release goal: piuparts clean archive

Hi, On Mittwoch, 25. September 2013, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > To propose a goal, you should create a page on the wiki [WIKI] with a short > goal description, details of the advocate(s) and how the goal will be > achieved. I've now created https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/piuparts which is

Re: chmsee and education-desktop-lxde

Hi Adam, On Sonntag, 29. September 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > We're considering removing chmsee from stable due to its > non-compatibility with newer iceweasel versions; see #723116. right. http://code.google.com/p/chmsee/ also suggests this, quote: == Stop maintain == ChmSee is not being d

Re: chmsee and education-desktop-lxde

Hi, On Sonntag, 29. September 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > We're considering removing chmsee from stable due to its I now also think it should be removed from sid+jessie... shall I file a bug requesting this or leave it to the maintainers? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description:

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

package: release.debian.org x-debbugs-cc: debian-release@lists.debian.org, debian-...@lists.debian.org Hi, On Sonntag, 22. September 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > The next point release for "wheezy" (7.2) is scheduled for Saturday > October 12th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding w

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi Adam, On Freitag, 4. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > The complete debdiffs are attached. > No, they're not. :-) (or the mail would probably never have made it to > -release). shall I attach them to this bug? [debian-edu-config-gosa-netgroups] > Well, we've always nacked introducing

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi, On Freitag, 4. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > So to be (crystal) clear: we should reupload slbackup with those > > NACKed > > changes removed?! > I'm arguing with myself a little over that one, in the "should we just > cover it under 'only -edu probably use it'" general sort of area.

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi Adam, On Samstag, 5. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > > So to be (crystal) clear: we should reupload slbackup with those > > > > NACKed changes removed?! > > > I'm arguing with myself a little over that one, in the "should we just > > > cover it under 'only -edu probably use it'" gene

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi Petter, On Samstag, 5. Oktober 2013, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > I suggest we upload n+1 (as in d-e-config 1.716 -> 1.717) versions to > unstable with the same sources which are currently in sid? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi, On Samstag, 5. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > If the blocker for the other three is that they'd end up with higher > versions than the current sid packages, then uploading them now is > fine. > > The archive version constraints apply to stable, not p-u, so it's fine > as long as thing

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

On Samstag, 5. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > -doc, -artwork and sitesummary flagged for acceptance. echo yay\! figlet thanks\! :) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#713049: pu: gosa - fix mass import of users in wheezy

Hi Adam, On Samstag, 13. Juli 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > gosa (2.7.4-4.3~deb7u1) stable-updates; urgency=low > fwiw, stable-updates is actually a different suite. :-) dak's mapping > rules DTRT though, so flagged for acceptance. hm, when running "dak ls debian-edu-artwork" on coccia.d.o I

Re: Bug#713049: pu: gosa - fix mass import of users in wheezy

Hi, On Sonntag, 6. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > "accepted" is basically an implementation detail of dak, for (aiui) > packages that have been added to the archive since the previous > dinstall. > > The important thing is that the package is in "proposed-updates", which > is what we moni

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi Adam, On Sonntag, 6. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Uploading slbackup with the change removed would be fine; thanks. Ok, will (try to) prepare the package today while traveling and shall upload tomorrow evening at latest. > debian-edu itself is a little more complicated, as the new

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

Hi, On Sonntag, 6. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > debian-edu itself is a little more complicated, as the new version adds > a dependency on the new package from debian-edu-config, so we'd have to > take the new versions together (or neither). I'd still like to have more > team discussion a

Re: First autoremovals happen in about 8 days

Hi, On Dienstag, 8. Oktober 2013, Bill Allombert wrote: > So while it is possible that the _maintainer_ is not needing a friendly > remainder, other interested third-party might. anyone interested in a package can opt-in via the PTS... cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is

Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

severity 662914 serious thanks Hi Adam, On Dienstag, 8. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > That happened and, with a short stopover in NEW, debian-edu 1.713+deb7u1 > is now in proposed-updates. yay, thanks! > As per your comments on IRC, slbackup has not been uploaded at this > point, to a

Re: wheezy-ignore for GFDL and "postinst uses /usr/share/doc" bugs?

Hi Julien, On Dienstag, 12. November 2013, Julien Cristau wrote: > > looking at http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi?release=wheezy&rc=1 I wonder if > > it would be appropriate to tag all these GDFL-issues and "postinst uses > > /usr/share/doc" bugs with wheezy-ignore, assuming they probably will not >

Re: Bug#733158: pu: package libmicrohttpd/0.9.20-1

Hi, happy new year! On Donnerstag, 26. Dezember 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > I prepared a new version and uploaded it to mentors [1] with the [...] > Please go ahead; thanks. uploaded. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [pkg-bacula-devel] Bug#735347: Sourceless file

Hi stable release managers, On Samstag, 18. Januar 2014, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > > This file is not included into binary package, so we can simply remove > > it from original tarball. > Yes > > > Should this bug be fixed for wheezy? > See stable release team is it ok to tag all these bugs ("s

Re: [pkg-bacula-devel] Bug#735347: Sourceless file

tags 735347 + wheezy-ignore tags 735355 + wheezy-ignore tags 735941 + wheezy-ignore tags 735500 + wheezy-ignore tags 737457 + wheezy-ignore tags 737442 + wheezy-ignore tags 737434 + wheezy-ignore tags 737433 + wheezy-ignore tags 736806 + wheezy-ignore tags 736799 + wheezy-ignore tags 736795 + wheez

more sourceless but distributable files in wheezy

tags 736954 + wheezy-ignore tags 736866 + wheezy-ignore tags 736439 + wheezy-ignore tags 735349 + wheezy-ignore tags 735346 + wheezy-ignore tags 735344 + wheezy-ignore tags 723880 + wheezy-ignore tags 723039 + wheezy-ignore tags 723036 + wheezy-ignore thanks # .oO( aint javascript without source c

Re: more sourceless but distributable files in wheezy

tags 735895 + wheezy-ignore tags 735498 + wheezy-ignore tags 735342 + wheezy-ignore tags 735341 + wheezy-ignore tags 735337 + wheezy-ignore tags 735238 + wheezy-ignore tags 735237 + wheezy-ignore tags 735229 + wheezy-ignore tags 735234 + wheezy-ignore tags 735227 + wheezy-ignore tags 735121 + wheez

Re: more sourceless but distributable files in wheezy

tags 735237 + wheezy-ignore tags 735225 + wheezy-ignore tags 720038 + wheezy-ignore tags 714346 + wheezy-ignore tags 710270 + wheezy-ignore tags 709520 + wheezy-ignore tags 682770 + wheezy-ignore tags 625524 + wheezy-ignore thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

debian/copyright & GFDL, problems in stable

Hi, is it ok to tag all 16 bugs mentioning GFDL issues on http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi?release=wheezy&rc=1 with the wheezy-ignore tag? #708885 is a good example for this class of bugs. After all, these bugs will be fixed in sid and jessie and GFDL is perfectly fine to distribute. cheers,

missing licence for a few files in debian/copyright, problems in stable

Hi, is it ok to tag all those bugs about a very few files missing the correct licence statememts in debian/copyright shown in http://udd.debian.org/bugs.cgi?release=wheezy&rc=1 with the wheezy-ignore tag? #737110 is a good example for this class of bugs. After all, these bugs will be fixed in

Re: debian/copyright & GFDL, problems in stable

Hi Niels, On Donnerstag, 6. Februar 2014, Niels Thykier wrote: > First, thanks for your hard work on cleaning up the number of RC bugs in > stable. :) :-) It aint hard work really, just repeatitive :) > At first glance, I would say that [1] applies to this question. > [1] https://lists.debian.

Re: debian/copyright & GFDL, problems in stable

tags 709492 + wheezy-ignore tags 709500 + wheezy-ignore tags 709498 + wheezy-ignore tags 709497 + wheezy-ignore tags 709495 + wheezy-ignore tags 709494 + wheezy-ignore tags 709491 + wheezy-ignore tags 708969 + wheezy-ignore tags 708966 + wheezy-ignore tags 708956 + wheezy-ignore tags 708955 + wheez

Re: BTS and UDD disagrees on the number of RC bugs in stable

Hi Don, On Freitag, 7. Februar 2014, Don Armstrong wrote: > I've now rolled this out, but bugscan's crontab hasn't run yet. I'll > keep an eye on it to make sure it works. https://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ doens't look like it's working :/ Could you please have a look again? cheers,

Re: BTS and UDD disagrees on the number of RC bugs in stable

Hi Don, On Freitag, 21. März 2014, Don Armstrong wrote: > So I think I've fixed this now; had to finally set up a testing > framework for bugscan to get at it, but that was long overdue anyway. yay! thanks! > I've just merged the changes, so we'll have to wait until the next > bugscan run to be

Re: missing licence for a few files in debian/copyright, problems in stable

tags 737110 + sid jessie thanks Hi Niels, On Donnerstag, 20. März 2014, Niels Thykier wrote: > I believe we mostly agreed on this on IRC, but as I recall you were > waiting for us to put it in a mail (so you could reference it). indeed, thanks! > We accept -ignore tags for bugs where the debia

Re: Processed: Re: Processed (with 1 errors): [jenkins.d.n] Hurd support on g-i-installation jobs

unblock 743670 by 742386 # please stop pressuring the release team thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: missing licence for a few files in debian/copyright, problems in stable

tags 742620 + wheezy-ignore thanks Hi, On Donnerstag, 20. März 2014, Niels Thykier wrote: > We accept -ignore tags for bugs where the debian/copyright is missing > licenses or copyright notices for files in the source package, > provided that the information is otherwise available in the source >

debsums seriously broken in stable

Hi, debsums is seriously broken in stable due to #744398 and this affects piuparts.d.o badly, so currently I've manually+hackishly installed debsums from the 2.0.52+nmu2 upload on piu-slave-bm-a.d.o, where I need it. But I (and DSA) would like to use a packaged version, so I wonder if the followi

pu: debsums 2.0.52+deb7u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: wheezy User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi, On Sonntag, 1. Juni 2014, Holger Levsen wrote: > debsums is seriously broken in stable due to #744398 and this affects > piuparts.d.o badly, so currently I'

Re: debsums seriously broken in stable

Hi, On Montag, 2. Juni 2014, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Holger Levsen (2014-06-01): > > + my $correct_package = `dpkg-query "--admindir=$DPKG" -S "$path" | > > awk -F: '{print \$1}'`; > > --show/--showformat instead of awk? well, thats sli

Bug#750195: pu: debsums 2.0.52+deb7u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: wheezy User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi, On Sonntag, 1. Juni 2014, Holger Levsen wrote: > debsums is seriously broken in stable due to #744398 and this affects > piuparts.d.o badly, so currently I'

Re: Sources licensed under PHP License and not being PHP are not distributable

Hi, while going through the list of (new) RC bugs claiming to affect wheezy, I noticed a whole bunch of "$foo is licensed under the PHP license and is not PHP" ones and am wondering if removal from stable is planned as well. Is it? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a

Re: Sources licensed under PHP License and not being PHP are not distributable

Hi, On Sonntag, 6. Juli 2014, Julien Cristau wrote: > > while going through the list of (new) RC bugs claiming to affect wheezy, > > I noticed a whole bunch of "$foo is licensed under the PHP license and > > is not PHP" ones and am wondering if removal from stable is planned as > > well. > > Is it

Re: Sources licensed under PHP License and not being PHP are not distributable

tags 752532 + wheezy-ignore tags 752533 + wheezy-ignore tags 752534 + wheezy-ignore tags 752535 + wheezy-ignore tags 752537 + wheezy-ignore tags 752614 + wheezy-ignore tags 752616 + wheezy-ignore tags 752618 + wheezy-ignore tags 752628 + wheezy-ignore tags 752629 + wheezy-ignore tags 752630 + wheez

missing Build-Using field serious? wheezy-ignore as well?

Hi, shall I tag bugs like #755498 wheezy-ignore? #755498: elilo: Add a Built-Using field for gnu-efi - jcristau suggested to just downgrade them, but I seem to recall a consensus those shall be serious bugs indeed? (Doesnt the ftp team want those as serious?) cheers, Holger sign

Re: missing Build-Using field serious? wheezy-ignore as well?

severity 755498 important thanks Hi, On Mittwoch, 23. Juli 2014, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Looking at #700026, filed by Ansgar, that was just a normal bug > (which you bumped to important). hm, ok, downgrading this one accordingly. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a

FYI: torbrowser-launcher might require updates during point releases

Dear SRMs, On Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2014, intrigeri wrote: > Micah Lee wrote (25 Jun 2014 18:35:45 GMT) : > > * TLS/x.509 security: torbrowser-launcher doesn't rely on the CA > > infrastructure. The only TLS it does is make HTTPS requests to > > check.torproject.org and (if you haven't set a mirror)

Bug#750195: pu: debsums 2.0.52+deb7u1

Hi, On Sonntag, 24. August 2014, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Please go ahead; thanks. > Gentle prod. :-) finally just uploaded debsums. cheers, Holger (should I have closed this bug now, or?) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

<    3   4   5   6   7   8