On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 14:02 +0000, Michael Casadevall wrote: > I was the one who requested your ban, due to the massive amounts of spam > to our trackers, and the resulting backscatter of email to every > backports developer (I believe at least 400 emails if not more were > sent). The resulting influx of now invalid bugs has made the trackers > you spammed (and it is spam) unusable since we can't easily find valid > requests among all the garbage, and I've asked LP staff to delete all > the bugs you filed against our trackers. > > It is rude to file so many bugs without discussing it with the project > administrators, especially if there was a chance if these bugs were > invalid. Furthermore, there is a VERY clear criteria for what qualifies > for a backport and what doesn't, and it quite clear that you didn't > bother to check the page on the proper way to request a backport. I ask > that you please stop touching any bugs on our trackers; we will close > these bugs ourselves, and ask that you do not file any backport requests > until you are clearly familiar with the process. Taking the [needs- > packaging] bug, and subscribing it to the backports trackers is NOT the > way to request a backport! > > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports - Please read this. > > ** Changed in: gutsy-backports > Status: Incomplete => Invalid > > ** Changed in: feisty-backports > Status: Incomplete => Invalid > Michael,
Are all of these backport tasks being invalidated? If so, do you want some help? There's quite a substantial number to go through. Cheers Chris -- [needs-packaging] NewGenLib - integrated library management system (ILS) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/262614 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
