On Sun, 2019-07-21 at 10:55 -0300, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> Sorry for not getting back to you about this earlier.
>
> On 7/7/19 3:43 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > [...]
> > > No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> > >
Hi,
On 18-08-2019 04:46, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages that
>> are in experimental, so if you interested in this, please contact me.
>
> **Yes please**. This will certainly help *a lot* specially for us that we
>
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 08:54:21AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > On 19/08/08 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > I think we should also try to improve the visibility towards reverse
> > > dependencies that their autopkgtest is blocking other packages. I would
> > > love tracker (and the old pts) to
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
> My personal point of view (and because of this it might be biased)
> is that the maintainers of the packages that ship autopkgtest should
> be the reponsibles for any
First of all sorry for the late late reply, I was hoping to find time to
reply to this sooner :-/
On 19/08/08 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07-08-2019 16:57, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release
> >
On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 19:25 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> [CC += ftpmaster]
>
> On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 17:49 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2019-07-21 at 10:55 -0300, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We are aware that src:linux is a special case here. I added an
> > > exception for
On 8/3/19 8:31 PM, Ivo De Decker wrote:
Hi,
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
Q: BinNMUs of packages uploaded before this new policy that have
arch:all binaries can no longer migrate to testing. Is that
intentional?
I read this as:
Q: I already did a binary upload, do I
On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 9 1:16:23 AM IST, Paul Gevers wrote:
>I can already trigger all the autopkgtests in unstable for packages
>that
>are in experimental, so if you interested in this, please contact me.
>This would enable library maintainers to at least have an overview of
>what would happen. I
Hi,
On 07-08-2019 16:57, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
> ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
>> No, what I have been perceiving (and pretty please note that this is my
>> personal "feeling")
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
> No, what I have been perceiving (and pretty please note that this is my
> personal "feeling") is that maintainers, specially library maintainers, have
&
[CC += ftpmaster]
On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 17:49 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-07-21 at 10:55 -0300, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> [...]
> > We are aware that src:linux is a special case here. I added an
> > exception for the arch:all binaries from src:linux. When the next
> > ABI bump in
On Sun, 2019-07-21 at 10:55 -0300, Ivo De Decker wrote:
[...]
> We are aware that src:linux is a special case here. I added an exception
> for the arch:all binaries from src:linux. When the next ABI bump in
> unstable happens, feel free to let me know, so that I can check if it
> works as
Hi Paul!
El sáb., 20 jul. 2019 16:42, Paul Gevers escribió:
> Hi Lisandro,
>
> On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> >> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
> >> ===
> >>
> >> From now on, all autopkgtest
Hi,
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
Q: BinNMUs of packages uploaded before this new policy that have
arch:all binaries can no longer migrate to testing. Is that
intentional?
I read this as:
Q: I already did a binary upload, do I need to do a new (source-only)
upload?
I
>> Q: BinNMUs of packages uploaded before this new policy that have
>>arch:all binaries can no longer migrate to testing. Is that
>>intentional?
>
> I read this as:
> Q: I already did a binary upload, do I need to do a new (source-only)
> upload?
I read this as
Q: The
Hi Stéphane,
On 02-08-2019 05:38, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> Le 07/07/2019 à 03:47, Jonathan Wiltshire a écrit :
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>> =
>>
>> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to
>> begin.
>> From
Le 07/07/2019 à 03:47, Jonathan Wiltshire a écrit :
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by maintainers to
Hi Ben,
Sorry for not getting back to you about this earlier.
On 7/7/19 3:43 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
[...]
No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
=
The release of buster also means the
Hi Lisandro,
On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
>> ===
>>
>> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for
>> bullseye. So if your
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 08:17, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:07PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > You indeed missed someone (for obvious reasons): I'd like to thank
> > the release team for their excellent work!
>
> +1
>
+lots
> > On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100,
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:07PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> You indeed missed someone (for obvious reasons): I'd like to thank
> the release team for their excellent work!
+1
> On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > The release of buster also means the bullseye
On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 02:47:00 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> There are too many people who should be thanked for their work on getting us
> to
> this point to list them all individually, and we would be sure to miss some.
> Nevertheless, we would like to particularly thank the installer team,
Hello,
On Tue 09 Jul 2019 at 08:45AM -04, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Why is it, then, that binary-NEW still applies if there have been no
> source files added/removed? (A SONAME bump possibly being necessitated
> by some change that does not involve adding/removing/renaming source
> files.)
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 01:33:49PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon 08 Jul 2019 at 02:02PM +02, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> > I would go even further and drop the (manual) NEW queue for binary-NEW
> > packages.
> > Is there a good reason why new binary packages need manual processing
Hello,
On Mon 08 Jul 2019 at 02:02PM +02, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I would go even further and drop the (manual) NEW queue for binary-NEW
> packages.
> Is there a good reason why new binary packages need manual processing by
> the FTP team? Couldn't this be fully automated?
The three things the
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by maintainers to
> migrate to testing. This means that you will need
Am 07.07.19 um 15:43 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> [...]
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>> =
>>
>> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to
>> begin.
>>
On 7/7/19 3:16 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 02:47:00AM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>> Shortly before the end of the 6th July, we released Debian 10, "buster".
>
> *yay* *yay* & *yay*!
>
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>>
> "Ben" == Ben Hutchings writes:
Ben> On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
Ben> [...]
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>> =
>>
>> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle
Hi!
[snip with a huge yay!]
> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
> ===
>
> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for
> bullseye. So if your package has failing autopkgtests, now is a good time to
On Sun, 2019-07-07 at 02:47 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
[...]
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 02:47:00AM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Shortly before the end of the 6th July, we released Debian 10, "buster".
*yay* *yay* & *yay*!
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means
Am Sonntag, den 07.07.2019, 02:47 +0100 schrieb Jonathan Wiltshire:
> Shortly before the end of the 6th July, we released Debian 10,
> "buster".
Is it intentional, that the "Version" value in InRelease files at [1]
has been removed? In non-security repositories this value is still
present in
❦ 7 juillet 2019 09:49 +00, Niels Thykier :
> I hope this answered your question to satisfaction.
Yes. Thanks!
--
A kind of Batman of contemporary letters.
-- Philip Larkin on Anthony Burgess
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Vincent Bernat:
> ❦ 7 juillet 2019 02:47 +01, Jonathan Wiltshire :
>
>> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
>> =
>>
>> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to
>> begin.
>> From now on, we will no longer allow
❦ 7 juillet 2019 02:47 +01, Jonathan Wiltshire :
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by maintainers to
Hi,
Shortly before the end of the 6th July, we released Debian 10, "buster".
There are too many people who should be thanked for their work on getting us to
this point to list them all individually, and we would be sure to miss some.
Nevertheless, we would like to particularly thank the
37 matches
Mail list logo
