[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#683400: freeze-exception for live-debconfig

Hash: SHA1

reassign 683400 ftp.debian.org
retitle 683400 please reject live-debconf from NEW

On 08/02/2012 09:54 PM, Philipp Kern wrote:
> They were in Cc, but you seem to be unable to summarize past 
> discussions, too.

honestly, i'm not sure how/if i can summarize it in public, it was a
private discussion between me, ftp-master, and eventually dam and dpl.

> You also seem to be unable to describe your changes to the existing
> packages that you want to do except for handwaiving.

i've taken out the standalone preseeding backend stuff from
src:live-config into src:live-debconfig.

> I don't see how we could handle this request, so I'm tagging it
> moreinfo now, even if it might as well be closed unless there's
> more useful input.

ok, let's close it then (or rather, reassign to ftp-masters.. so they
can reject live-debconfig 3 from NEW, and i'll re-upload it as version
4 for jessie, that they then can process without problems anytime soon.

> How would lxc depend on something live-*'ish?

for container configuration; the generic name for this was rejected by
ftp-master, bottom line is they think it's live-* stuff (eventhough it
is not), so it needed to use a package name out of the debian-live

> Please elaborate. What timeframe are you assuming?

we'll be having alpha1 out in a couple of days, so we have a baseline
of what still needs work. i expect one week (plus one week for safety)
until live-{build,boot,config,tools} is good enough for wheezy, and
after that, another week (plus one week for safety) for live-installer
and debian-installer-launcher. that would be somewhen arround end of
august. for live-manual i don't know about Bens plans, but should be
somewhat similar i think.

> As for uncooperativeness it doesn't help that you ignore half of
> the mails.

i'm not aware to not have answered (or even ignored) any mails send to
this bug report, did i?

> Maybe you need everything spelt out instead of blindly assuming 
> that you'd somehow get what questions we're aiming at.

i appreciate if you formulate questions in a direct, unambiguous and
an easy understandable way, yes.

> I should not assume malice, I guess.

i prefer if you don't.

- -- 
Address:        Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email:          daniel.baumann@progress-technologies.net
Internet:       http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


Reply to: