On 2022-09-08 13:00:11 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 01-09-2022 14:18, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Of course there are details to figure out and agree on, but before
> > diving into those I'd like to hear if you are open to support the idea
> > (hopefully even in time for bookworm) or if
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_source.changes
ACCEPT
Hi all,
On 01-09-2022 14:18, Paul Gevers wrote:
Of course there are details to figure out and agree on, but before
diving into those I'd like to hear if you are open to support the idea
(hopefully even in time for bookworm) or if there are already deep
concerns (that would take long to
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_source.changes
ACCEPT
Hi,
On 08-09-2022 13:59, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
So, maybe my main question is: if we don't consider issues on these
semi-supported architectures RC but they have a testing equivalent, why
don't the other ports architectures get the same treatment?
Fair question. One big reason is that the
On 2022-09-04 10:02:53 +0200, Drew Parsons wrote:
> All uploads are done now. Let the binNMUs rip.
The rebuilds have been done. The transition is now blocked on #1019287.
Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
[Filip Hanes]
> Hi,
> I'm new maintainer of casparcg-server after pere.
And I am very happy to have a replacement who actually use the
package. :) The package is also moved under the Debian Multimedia
umbrella, allowing more people to particiate. :)
>> 1) Chromium adds a chromium-source binary
Hi,
This is just a summary (TL;DR at the bottom) of my findings from the
past few days, while preparing d-i for the upcoming point releases. I
thought I would share in case anyone (e.g. future self) wonders what
might happen again in the future if we get unlucky again. I'll focus on
bullseye but
Thanks for the analysis and confirmation! :-)
On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 04:16:16PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Hi,
>
>This is just a summary (TL;DR at the bottom) of my findings from the
>past few days, while preparing d-i for the upcoming point releases. I
>thought I would share in case anyone
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_armel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_mipsel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_ppc64el-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_arm64-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_mips-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_mipsel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_armel-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_armhf-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_mips64el-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_arm64-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_armhf-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file:
debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_mips64el-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_s390x-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
El 07/09/22 a las 21:13, Paul Gevers escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> For transparency I'm letting you know that, with my Release Team manager hat
> on, I have just added a migration block on grep.
>
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 17:39:45 +0200 Santiago Ruano =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rinc=F3n?=
> wrote:
> > For the
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_amd64-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Paul Gevers wrote on 08/09/2022 at 22:35:35+0200:
> [[PGP Signed Part:No public key for 9C5C99EB05BD750A created at
> 2022-09-08T22:35:35+0200 using RSA]]
> Hi,
>
> On 08-09-2022 22:14, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> Would tier II be exclusively composed of builders that are currently
>>
Cyril Brulebois (2022-09-08):
> TL;DR: Everything matches what was already assessed by Steve McIntyre:
> mismatched shim* packages shouldn't be an issue from a d-i perspective,
> we're “just using the old shim” (sorry, buster…).
Furthermore, I've just checked on two laptops (Dell G3 and Asus
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_amd64-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20210731+deb11u5_i386-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Hi,
Paul Gevers wrote on 08/09/2022 at 13:00:11+0200:
> [[PGP Signed Part:No public key for 9C5C99EB05BD750A created at
> 2022-09-08T13:00:11+0200 using RSA]]
> Hi all,
>
> On 01-09-2022 14:18, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> Of course there are details to figure out and agree on, but before
>> diving
Hi,
On 08-09-2022 22:14, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
Would tier II be exclusively composed of builders that are currently
supported by DSA?
My current proposal is ONLY about splitting the current release
architectures. And for the future, my idea for tier II (or Best Effort)
would indeed be
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20190702+deb10u13_i386-buildd.changes
ACCEPT
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
It would be good if we could eliminate wxwidgets3.0 from the archive for
bullseye - the last upstream release (3.0.5.1) was over 2 years ago, and
there's very little upstream interest in
23 matches
Mail list logo
