On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Frederik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Slightly off topic, but: has the introduction of Samba 3.2.0, which is
GPLv3, had any repercussions for other packages? Did SMB support in
some packages with incompatible licenses (for example GPLv2 only?)
which link to libsmb
Quoting Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
As you wish, but there are several significant bugs
(with printing for one) that have been fixed for the
3.2.1 release.
Yeah. I definitely know that. But, in that case, I'm just one of the
dozens Debian developers and I have no power to
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
As the testing branch is the future stable release of the Debian
distribution, this means that Samba 3.2.0 will be in the upcoming
release of Debian, codename lenny.
Hopefully the smb.conf man page will finally be
Slightly off topic, but: has the introduction of Samba 3.2.0, which is
GPLv3, had any repercussions for other packages? Did SMB support in
some packages with incompatible licenses (for example GPLv2 only?)
which link to libsmb now needed to be disabled? Or was not this really
a problem in
(sorry, long replybut it contains many ideas about handling stable
releases both for distros and for upstream software...That answer is
BCC'ed to our package development list)
Quoting Jeremy Allison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
As you wish, but there are several significant bugs
(with printing for
Quoting Charles Marcus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Is that right? Does that mean that if something is completely broken, it
will stay that way for the life of the Debian release?
This is actually one of the reasons I don't use Debian...
Just out of curiosity, and mostly because I *really* don't
Quoting Ryan Novosielski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Only security patches.
Is that right? Does that mean that if something is completely broken, it
will stay that way for the life of the Debian release?
s/Only security patches/Only release critical issues
So, something completely broken would
After several months of testing in the experimental branch of
Debian, samba 3.2.0 was uploaded to Debian unstable as of July 20th
2008 and entered the testing branch of the distribution as of August
1st.
As the testing branch is the future stable release of the Debian
distribution, this means
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Perrier wrote:
After several months of testing in the experimental branch of
Debian, samba 3.2.0 was uploaded to Debian unstable as of July 20th
2008 and entered the testing branch of the distribution as of August
1st.
As the testing
Quoting Ryan Novosielski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Seems to me they should have been a lot more reluctant to freeze on a
point zero release rather than reluctant at this point. I would be
willing to bet that there are a lot of serious problems that would
appear with any first release.
Debian is
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:48:53AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
Having 3.2.1 (when it's released) will be much more difficult as that will
require a freeze exception which the Debian release managers *will* be
very reluctant to make, so I'm much less optimistic for this. Steve
(Langasek)
Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Ryan Novosielski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Seems to me they should have been a lot more reluctant to freeze on a
point zero release rather than reluctant at this point. I would be
willing to bet that there are a lot of serious problems that would
appear with any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Ryan Novosielski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Seems to me they should have been a lot more reluctant to freeze on a
point zero release rather than reluctant at this point. I would be
willing to bet that there are a lot
On 8/5/2008 12:19 PM, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
I know Debian tends to backport patches, but it would seem like this
would be a bit of a pain to start from this point.
Only security patches.
Is that right? Does that mean that if something is completely broken, it
will stay that way for the life
Jason A. Nunnelley wrote:
I'm probably wrong (I usually am) - but my understanding is if there
is a problem with a released package, and the distro team doesn't
want to upgrade to a new upstream version, the responsibility for
repairing those problems lies with the packagers. Based on the
Following up in that thread...
I did a first attempt to build 3.2.0 for Debian yesterday and
everything went fine.
The current status of TODOs about this is:
- do the preparation work in our packaging SVN repository (import
upstream source and do it properly for once so that Steve Langasek
16 matches
Mail list logo
