On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 01:02:43PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Definitely makes sense. I don't have a strong preference over the exact
procedure as well. How did ubuntu-release handle FFe's so far? I assume the
worklist is the list of subscribed bugs?
Yep, precisely.
Do you also use the
Since there are no objections to the proposed diff, I've applied it now
(plus Daniel's correction). I'll send out an announcement mail in the next
day or so informing developers of the new procedure, then mass-migrate the
motu-release bug subscriptions over to ubuntu-release.
On Sun, Feb 28
-release and motu-release approaches, but I think it would be
strange
to be applying different procedures for different archive sections -
or to
different members of the team! - so we should probably pick one...
I think it should go. IMO one of the main reasons to unify
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 03:52:49PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Regarding the team unification, is there an expectation that the two-vote
approach will continue? I don't have a strong preference between the
ubuntu-release and motu-release approaches, but I think it would be strange
one small oversight that I spotted:
+ * Or ask a member of the `ubuntu-release`
[[http://launchpad.net/~motu-release|team]] on IRC of approval for the
debdiff.
That should be ~ubuntu-release, I guess.
Are there any team delegations we want to have in place before sending out
the announcement
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 03:52:49PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Regarding the team unification, is there an expectation that the
two-vote
approach will continue? I don't have a strong preference between the
ubuntu-release and motu-release approaches, but I think it would be
strange
Hi,
Am Thursday 18 February 2010 02:09:04 schrieb Steve Langasek:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Agreed. Delegating freeze decisions for a set of packages matches very
much what we've done with delegates so far :).
motu-release chose the relevant delegates
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 01:42:29PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
As a first step, I suggest merging motu-release and ubuntu-release for
lucid.
This seems to be the consensus so far, anyone disagree?
As FeatureFreeze is already tomorrow, I think we should immediately try to
find
-release and motu-release approaches, but I think it would be strange
to be applying different procedures for different archive sections - or to
different members of the team! - so we should probably pick one...
Definitely makes sense. I don't have a strong preference over the exact
procedure as well
On Thursday 18 February 2010 06:21:34 am Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 01:42:29PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
As a first step, I suggest merging motu-release and ubuntu-release for
lucid.
This seems to be the consensus so far, anyone disagree?
As FeatureFreeze
On 17.02.2010 11:03, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 03:03:35PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
- Merge motu-release and ubuntu-release? Add team members of the
flavours to ubuntu-release to form kind of a release
taskforce?
As a first step, I suggest merging motu-release
exceptions
too. (The MOTU Release team had delegates of various teams that
made decisions, which worked out well.)
Between Jonathan's Riddell's status as a member of the release team, and his
repeated delegation by motu-release regarding Kubuntu packages in universe,
I think that reasonably
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 01:04:25AM +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday 27 January 2010 09:03:35 am Stefan Potyra wrote:
FeatureFreeze is less than a month away, so the discussion over
restaffing the current MOTU Release team, which is a short of members
[1
Hi,
Am Wednesday 17 February 2010 11:03:09 schrieb Steve Langasek:
[..]
- Merge motu-release and ubuntu-release? Add team members of the
flavours to ubuntu-release to form kind of a release
taskforce?
As a first step, I suggest merging motu-release and ubuntu-release for
lucid
it would
make sense to let them make decisions in terms of freeze exceptions
too. (The MOTU Release team had delegates of various teams that
made decisions, which worked out well.)
Between Jonathan's Riddell's status as a member of the release team, and
his repeated delegation by motu
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Agreed. Delegating freeze decisions for a set of packages matches very much
what we've done with delegates so far :).
motu-release chose the relevant delegates themselves. With decisions in
terms
of freeze exceptions, I meant
Am Donnerstag, den 28.01.2010, 01:04 +0900 schrieb Emmet Hikory:
motu-sru and ubuntu-sru merged into a single team. I've had a couple of
conversations with people in terms of doing something simllar with motu-
release and ubuntu-release. I think it's the right answer. So far it's
been
Hi,
FeatureFreeze is less than a month away, so the discussion over
restaffing the current MOTU Release team, which is a short of members
[1], brought up the topic how best to deal with release decisions in
light of Permissions Reorg.
I've (only) talked to Daniel so far and we came up
On Wednesday 27 January 2010 09:03:35 am Stefan Potyra wrote:
Hi,
FeatureFreeze is less than a month away, so the discussion over
restaffing the current MOTU Release team, which is a short of members
[1], brought up the topic how best to deal with release decisions in
light of Permissions
Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday 27 January 2010 09:03:35 am Stefan Potyra wrote:
FeatureFreeze is less than a month away, so the discussion over
restaffing the current MOTU Release team, which is a short of members
[1], brought up the topic how best to deal with release decisions in
light
Scott Kitterman wrote:
The final deadline for motu-release approved uploads has passed. We had a
good run of fixing the last few days. Thanks everyone for the work.
In the event of any OMG, kittens! issues for Universe/Multiverse, please
contact ubuntu-release.
Scott K
For the MOTU
On 2009-10-28 10:50:24 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
Is there a way we could speed up SRUs for the next week? As I
understand it the current process requires uploading the package to
Lucid before backporting the fix.
Does this mean updates are going to be impossible until Lucid is
available?
The final deadline for motu-release approved uploads has passed. We had a
good run of fixing the last few days. Thanks everyone for the work.
In the event of any OMG, kittens! issues for Universe/Multiverse, please
contact ubuntu-release.
Scott K
For the MOTU Release Team
--
Ubuntu-motu
Hi there,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:20:25AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
The final deadline for motu-release approved uploads has passed. We had a
good run of fixing the last few days. Thanks everyone for the work.
In the event of any OMG, kittens! issues for Universe/Multiverse, please
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 08:20 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
The final deadline for motu-release approved uploads has passed. We had a
good run of fixing the last few days. Thanks everyone for the work.
In the event of any OMG, kittens! issues for Universe/Multiverse, please
contact ubuntu
2009/8/25 Iulian Udrea iul...@ubuntu.com
* Sebastien Bacher (seb128) was proposed again to act as a delegate for
Ubuntu
Desktop packages this cycle. This is still unclear, unfortunately.
Action: Iulian Udrea (iulian) to send an e-mail to the ubuntu-desktop ML to
find out
who will act as a
to be available until the 24th.
I would very much like to see all members of the motu-release team
present at the meeting.
yes, I agree.
That date works for me.
Works for me as well.
I think it's better to meet sooner. I doubt I will disagree on anything.
Ouh, OK. You can always
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Iulian Udreaiul...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Nathan, does Friday, the 21st, 13:00 UTC work for you as well?
It looks like my reply only went to Steve, and not the list.
I could do Monday the 17th at 13:00 UTC, but I can't do 13:00 UTC on
Friday the 21st. I can do a
2009/8/14 Nathan Handler nhand...@ubuntu.com
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Iulian Udreaiul...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Nathan, does Friday, the 21st, 13:00 UTC work for you as well?
It looks like my reply only went to Steve, and not the list.
I could do Monday the 17th at 13:00 UTC, but I
Hi folks,
first off, welcome Steve, great to see you joining motu-release!
Now, Feature Freeze starting at August 27 is not too far ahead, I'd like
everyone to get ready for it.
In particular: Start to fix
1) uninstallable packages [1]
2) FTBFS [2]
3) review NEW packages on REVU [3]
4
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Stefan
Potyrastefan.pot...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de wrote:
first off, welcome Steve, great to see you joining motu-release!
Thanks! I'm happy to help out
Now, with Feature Freeze pending, maybe it would be a good idea to do a
motu-release meeting again
2009/8/13 Steve Stalcup vor...@ubuntu.com
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Stefan
Potyrastefan.pot...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de wrote:
first off, welcome Steve, great to see you joining motu-release!
Thanks! I'm happy to help out
Now, with Feature Freeze pending, maybe it would
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Iulian Udreaiul...@ubuntu.com wrote:
What about Friday, the 21st?
Scott, when do you come back from holiday?
I would very much like to see all members of the motu-release team present
at the meeting.
That date works for me.
Steve
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing
Hi,
Am Thursday 13 August 2009 16:27:36 schrieb Steve Stalcup:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Iulian Udreaiul...@ubuntu.com wrote:
What about Friday, the 21st?
Scott, when do you come back from holiday?
I would very much like to see all members of the motu-release team
present
all members of the motu-release team
present at the meeting.
yes, I agree.
That date works for me.
Works for me as well.
I think it's better to meet sooner. I doubt I will disagree on anything.
Scott K
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings
Hi folks,
first off, welcome Steve, great to see you joining motu-release!
Now, Feature Freeze starting at August 27 is not too far ahead, I'd like
everyone to get ready for it.
In particular: Start to fix
1) uninstallable packages [1]
2) FTBFS [2]
3) review NEW packages on REVU [3]
4) sponsor
Stefan Potyra wrote:
In particular: Start to fix
1) uninstallable packages [1]
2) FTBFS [2]
3) review NEW packages on REVU [3]
4) sponsor fixes [4]
(more or less random list from my head, please anynone chime in with
additions/corrections)
Maybe add the NBS-List to this, packages that
to the motu-release team. I know that Steve will do a great job with
helping us during
this and future releases.
Welcome to the team Steve!
Sincerely,
Nathan Handler
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo
On Friday 31 July 2009 15:14:36 Steve Stalcup wrote:
I [1,2] would like to volunteer for this opening.
+1 from me[1] too.
First hand experience of quality management from vorian of our KDE releases
multiple times this spring.
/Andreas
[1] https://launchpad.net/~andreas-wenning
--
,-¤.
On Thursday 30 July 2009 10:54:59 am Nathan Handler wrote:
Hello Ubuntu Developers,
Hi
If you are an Ubuntu Developer who feels that
you would be capable of managing the packages in universe and multiverse in
order to ensure they are in good condition for the release,
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:14:36 -0400 Steve Stalcup vor...@ubuntu.com wrote:
...
I [1,2] would like to volunteer for this opening.
+1 from me.
Scott K
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Steve Stalcupvor...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I [1,2] would like to volunteer for this opening.
+1 from me too.
Nathan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
I am not a MOTU, but I can warmly recommend Steve.
He has helped me with packaging problems several times and manages KDE
packaging very professional.
Regards Christian
--
neversfe...@jabber.neversfelde.de
neversfelde on irc.freenode.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hello Ubuntu Developers,
First, thanks a lot Luca for all of the time that you put into the MOTU Release
team. You were a big help, and you will be missed.
Now, without Luca, the MOTU Release team only has four members [1]. With Feature
Freeze [2
Hi Luca,
Am Tuesday 07 July 2009 19:11:30 schrieb Luca Falavigna:
Hello,
I decided to resign from motu-release and ubuntu-universe-sponsors queue
administrator teams due to time constraints. These two roles require
much attention than the one I can give to them right now.
That's sad to hear
Hello,
I decided to resign from motu-release and ubuntu-universe-sponsors queue
administrator teams due to time constraints. These two roles require
much attention than the one I can give to them right now.
I would like to thank existing and former team members for their job and
for the work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Luca Falavignadktrkr...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I decided to resign from motu-release and ubuntu-universe-sponsors queue
administrator teams due to time constraints. These two roles require
much attention than the one I
2009/7/7 Luca Falavigna dktrkr...@ubuntu.com
Hello,
Hello Luca
I decided to resign from motu-release and ubuntu-universe-sponsors queue
administrator teams due to time constraints. These two roles require
much attention than the one I can give to them right now.
I would like to thank
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:23:20AM EST, Nathan Handler wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Luca Falavignadktrkr...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I decided to resign from motu-release and ubuntu-universe-sponsors queue
administrator teams due to time
motu-release. Have I missed
them? If not, what has been stopping this from happening?
Also, aren't QA activities the purview of the QA team? If motu-release
would like to be involved with that then should this be as a liason with
the QA team?
There are several: FTBFS, NBS, transitions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
First of all, thanks Jordan for your questions.
Jordan Mantha ha scritto:
Post FF if someone wants to start a library transition it ought to have an
FFe from motu-release. This is how we've operated for some time and nothing
new (I don't think
During the Intrepid cycle the MOTU release team members were asked to come up
with a charter for the team. It's taken us some time to get a draft
together, but this:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/MOTUReleaseCharter
is something all current members of the team are happy with. It is still
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:18:46 -0700 Jordan Mantha laserj...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
During the Intrepid cycle the MOTU release team members were asked to come up
with a charter for the team. It's taken us some time to get
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nathan Handler ha scritto:
I would like to apply to become the 5th member of the motu-release team.
I second Nathan's application.
Regards,
- --
. ''`. Luca Falavigna
: :' : Ubuntu MOTU Developer
`. `'` Debian Maintainer
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 04:25:45AM +, Nathan Handler wrote:
[..]
Hello,
I [1] would like to apply to become the 5th member of the motu-release
team. I filed many Freeze Exception requests during the last release
cycle, and I understand the impact upgrades can have. I also have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nathan Handler ha scritto:
I would like to apply to become the 5th member of the motu-release team.
We scheduled a motu-release meeting on Monday 16, 19 UTC. Could you
attend it to discuss a bit about your candidature? Thanks in advance!
Regards
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Luca Falavigna dktrkr...@ubuntu.com wrote:
We scheduled a motu-release meeting on Monday 16, 19 UTC. Could you
attend it to discuss a bit about your candidature? Thanks in advance!
I think I should be able to make that meeting.
Nathan
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing
freeze?
Hello,
I [1] would like to apply to become the 5th member of the motu-release
team. I filed many Freeze Exception requests during the last release
cycle, and I understand the impact upgrades can have. I also have
devoted a lot of time to reviewing patches, merge/sync requests, and
new
and patches, also have the ability to make unliked decisions like
rejecting freeze exceptions, then motu-release needs you. Please send in your
application as reply to this thread.
Oh, and being a MOTU is required.
Side-word: Imho we could also need bug-triagers that help with looking
the call for volunteers, Iulian was the victim to
become a member of motu-release. Questions were asked and Iulian
answered them all to our consent [and he's a member
of motu-release in the meantime].
2) bi-weekly ubuntu-release meetings:
Scottk brought this up, and thought it would be good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stefan Potyra ha scritto:
* DktrKranz to take a stab at drafting a motu-release policy.
A first, short draft is available here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/MOTUReleaseCharter
Regards,
- --
. ''`. Luca Falavigna
: :' : Ubuntu MOTU
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Iulian Udrea ha scritto:
I would like to join the MOTU Release team, so please consider this
my application to become a MOTU Release member.
I second Iulian's application.
Regards,
- --
. ''`. Luca Falavigna
: :' : Ubuntu MOTU Developer
Hi,
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 12:02:43 Luca Falavigna wrote:
Iulian Udrea ha scritto:
I would like to join the MOTU Release team, so please consider this
my application to become a MOTU Release member.
I second Iulian's application.
I also second Iulian's application.
Cheers
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:08:49 +0100 Stefan Potyra
stefan.pot...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 12:02:43 Luca Falavigna wrote:
Iulian Udrea ha scritto:
I would like to join the MOTU Release team, so please consider this
my application to become a MOTU
, Cesare, for your efforts within the motu-release
team!
Now looking that [1], I see that we've only 3 members left, so I guess
motu-release could need at least one or better yet two more members.
Now I completely forgot what the policy to add more members to key teams
was,
but I vaguely recall
2009/2/4 Siegfried-Angel siggi.gevat...@gmail.com:
And me :).
In case it wasn't clear, that's an I also second Iulian's application.
--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
Ubuntu Developer. Debian Contributor.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or
And me :).
--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
Ubuntu Developer. Debian Contributor.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Soyer Jerome wrote:
and me :-)
Build and Maintain an Ubuntu every day for French Education
(http://eole.orion.education.fr/)
I'm responsible of package building, and CD/DVD building.
Jerome.
Thanks for your interest in joining the MOTU Release team. This
team is restricted
Unfortunately, I'm rather busy at the moment and won't be able to contribute
much for this (and I'm afraid also next) release, certainly not as a
motu-release member. Please remove me from the team, if any volunteer want to
step in to fill the post please do so.
Cheers,
norsetto
Hi Cesare,
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 11:41:32 norse...@alice.it wrote:
Unfortunately, I'm rather busy at the moment and won't be able to
contribute much for this (and I'm afraid also next) release, certainly not
as a motu-release member. Please remove me from the team, if any volunteer
Hi,
first of all thanks a lot, Cesare, for your efforts within the motu-release
team!
Now looking that [1], I see that we've only 3 members left, so I guess
motu-release could need at least one or better yet two more members.
Now I completely forgot what the policy to add more members to key
Stefan Potyra wrote:
Now I completely forgot what the policy to add more members to key teams was,
but I vaguely recall that it started with asking for applicants on this list.
So that's what I'm doing right now.
The policy for membership in motu-release is detailed in the wiki
(1
norse...@alice.it wrote:
Unfortunately, I'm rather busy at the moment and won't be able to
contribute much for this (and I'm afraid also next) release, certainly
not as a motu-release member. Please remove me from the team, if any
volunteer want to step in to fill the post please do so
2009/1/28 Stefan Potyra stefan.pot...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de
Hi,
Hello
Now looking that [1], I see that we've only 3 members left, so I guess
motu-release could need at least one or better yet two more members.
I would like to join the MOTU Release team, so please consider this
my
Hi motu-release members,
with FeatureFreeze approaching at Feb 19, I guess it'd be good if we schedule
an organisational meeting. What do you think?
What date would suit you? Maybe this Friday, at 14.00h UTC?
Cheers,
Stefan.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stefan Potyra ha scritto:
What date would suit you? Maybe this Friday, at 14.00h UTC?
Probably I'll be buried in office for that time, I'd rather prefer
Tuesday, February 3rd at the same timeframe, but I'll try to be there
anytime (I can't promise I
Hi,
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 15:03:11 Luca Falavigna wrote:
Stefan Potyra ha scritto:
What date would suit you? Maybe this Friday, at 14.00h UTC?
Probably I'll be buried in office for that time, I'd rather prefer
Tuesday, February 3rd at the same timeframe, but I'll try to be there
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:05:14 +0100 Stefan Potyra
stefan.pot...@informatik.uni-erlangen.de wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 15:03:11 Luca Falavigna wrote:
Stefan Potyra ha scritto:
What date would suit you? Maybe this Friday, at 14.00h UTC?
Probably I'll be buried in office for that
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 12:14:53AM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Technically, there aren't any powers that motu-release has, that any
other developer doesn't have: motu-release cannot reject a new
upstream version while in FeatureFreeze, nor can we accept an uploaded
package while in deep freeze
Stefan Potyra wrote:
Technically, there aren't any powers that motu-release has, that any other
developer doesn't have: motu-release cannot reject a new upstream version
while in FeatureFreeze, nor can we accept an uploaded package while in deep
freeze (that's left to archive-admins).
Just
Hi,
On Monday 27 October 2008 04:37:48 Emmet Hikory wrote:
Soren Hansen wrote:
Dear motu-release!
In order to reduce misunderstandings, the MC would like to request that
you, motu-release, come up with a proposal for a charter for yourself.
We'd like to be able to discuss and approve
Soren Hansen wrote:
Dear motu-release!
In order to reduce misunderstandings, the MC would like to request that
you, motu-release, come up with a proposal for a charter for yourself.
We'd like to be able to discuss and approve it at the next MOTU Meeting,
if possible.
It's been a while
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:17:35 -0400
Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-April/025259.html
One might think it's now, but I propose this not start until the last
week before release (i.e. one more week from now).
+1, one
Hi,
On Thursday 16 October 2008 12:33:51 Cesare Tirabassi wrote:
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:17:35 -0400
Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-April/025259.html
One might think it's now, but I propose this not start until
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:41:53 +0200 Stefan Potyra
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 16 October 2008 12:33:51 Cesare Tirabassi wrote:
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:17:35 -0400
Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on:
right now (bugfixes,
archive cleanups, and so on) should be granted an exception until RC,
after that deadline every upload should be ACKed by motu-release before
leaving unapproved queue. FFe requests should be approved as usual.
Regards,
--
. ''`. Luca Falavigna
: :' : Ubuntu MOTU
Based on:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-April/025259.html
One might think it's now, but I propose this not start until the last week
before release (i.e. one more week from now).
Comments (particularly from motu-release, but others welcome)?
Scott K
--
Ubuntu-motu
Hi again,
On Thursday 16 October 2008 12:41:53 Stefan Potyra wrote:
[..]
Would it be even possible to set universe/multiverse back to auto until
that time?
wgrant sistpoty|work: Launchpad provides no facility to freeze just some
components.
Cheers,
Stefan.
signature.asc
Description:
On 2008-09-04 01:36:51 +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
Understood. When the remaining members return from vacation,
could a proposed charter be prepared and presented at the following
MOTU Meeting? Given the new decision process, it may be appropriate
to send it with enough advance time that
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008, Mathias Gug wrote:
Binaries installed by the administrator should take precedence over
binaries provided by packages.
Yes, I think this should be the case by default.
If the admin wants his binaries to only take precedence in a
particular use case, he could
Moins,
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 00:08 -0400, Mathias Gug wrote:
Hi Loïc,
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:43:19PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008, Mathias Gug wrote:
This was indeed suggested at the very beginning of the bug thread [1] by
using /etc/profile.d/. However it was
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008, Mathias Gug wrote:
* it's not against policy to setup a system to try to expand its PATH
to use additional data, as long as using the default PATH wouldn't
break the system and its packages
What do you mean by as long as using the default PATH wouldn't break
Hi Loïc,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
Do you mean that only the gem system should be setup to use gem
installed binaries ?
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best effort basis because packages will
On Thursday 04 September 2008 21:13, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best effort basis because packages will
continue to work whether PATH
accepted.
I urge the team owner to formally add Luca Falavigna, aka Dktrkranz, as a
motu-release team member asap.
Thanks,
Cesare
[1]https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Teams/KeyTeamPolicy
[2]https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/2008-August/004573.html
[3]https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives
application should be considered accepted.
I urge the team owner to formally add Luca Falavigna, aka Dktrkranz, as a
motu-release team member asap.
Done. Congratulations Luca!
--
Emmet HIKORY
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https
concern having been raised,
considering that 168 hours have elapsed,
Luca application should be considered accepted.
I urge the team owner to formally add Luca Falavigna, aka Dktrkranz, as a
motu-release team member asap.
Done. Congratulations Luca!
--
Emmet HIKORY
--
Motu-council
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:06:31 +0200 Soren Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear motu-release!
In order to reduce misunderstandings, the MC would like to request that
you, motu-release, come up with a proposal for a charter for yourself.
We'd like to be able to discuss and approve it at the next MOTU
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 01:49:02AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:43:19PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
Is there any shell which doesn't honor the PATH in /etc/environment?
If yes, I think it's a bug; if not, we can build on the PATH set in
this file IMO.
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
