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

Bug#712152: marked as done (www.debian.org: proposed-updates page does not actually explain how do to one. Needs clarification.)

Your message dated Fri, 05 Jul 2013 22:21:19 -0400
with message-id <51D77F1F.1010402@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#712152: www.debian.org: proposed-updates page does not actually explain how do to one. Needs clarification.
has caused the Debian Bug report #712152,
regarding www.debian.org: proposed-updates page does not actually explain how do to one. Needs clarification.
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
712152: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=712152
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: normal

I was asked to do a stable release update, which needs an upload to
proposed-updates. I had never done one, so looked for some docs.
The top hit was the page:
http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates

But after reading that, despite being an experienced DD, I still
didn't know what I actually needed to do. Nowhere does it say "To do a
proposed-update upload, you upload to the normal debian upload
machine, as for an unstable upload, but with the Distribution in the
changes file set to the targetted 'Distribution:' ('stable', or current
stable codename). It is this suitename that sends the upload to the
correct internal queue". Or something like that.

The existing text "New packages can arrive into proposed-updates when
Debian developers upload them either to "proposed-updates"
("oldstable-proposed-updates"), or to "stable" ("oldstable")." is
clearly intended to convey this info, but that makes it sound like
'proposed-updates' is a special upload machine/place, perhaps
configured in dupload.conf or dput.cf, or maybe it's a string to go in
the 'Distribution:' field. The page is clearly written by someone who
understands the back-end, not for a user that wants to do the right
thing but is vague about how it all works. SPlitting it into 'How it
all works' and 'What to do if uploading' sections would probably work
a lot better.

I'll try to find time to rewrite the page and send a patch, but in the
meantime am filing this bug to record the issue.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers quantal-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'quantal-updates'), (500, 'quantal-security'), (500, 'quantal')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-35-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium.  Thank you.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

Le 13/06/2013 13:08, David Prévot a écrit :
> Le 13/06/2013 10:36, Adam D. Barratt a écrit :
>> On 2013-06-13 14:47, Wookey wrote:
> 
>>> http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates
>>>
>>> But after reading that, despite being an experienced DD, I still
>>> didn't know what I actually needed to do.
[…]
>> The dev-ref has a section on stable updates,
> 
> We could offer a link to the accurate section, patch* welcome (*just a
> wording proposal would do, I don’t mind editing the page and provide the
> relevant hyperlink, but some English-enlightened wording would be better
> than all the gibberish I would be able to provide).

Since nobody seems interested to propose something like “instructions
are available in the developers reference”, closing the bug since nobody
is going to act on it.

Regards

David

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJR138eAAoJEAWMHPlE9r08ShcIAKVXwUd9f7DNIFco8iAWzGHS
FgVUIJieLW+6X80Da4quqhldz94w8AK6S6ZvjUxDfL6VWqlVKCl/jRfCcXlM4WsQ
dUmpH9f6MCus7puQk3p0+OO6qRaz+lqyDcS6goBuV2HcqR0LuYn2FjUjhQlfeV7F
FtZV6Zla+/T4grTRaEWlN+HUxqHKmAttlpK9nHzBWWQ/pbBgvMnQminHegmL1v2P
Ouyk52/sJq3lW0NGzFDD/mW/+MUOW87v8h+hOqY9suhmZN13uj60bI4EoavDcJmA
jgIEptC9lkMgvIHjx/nwmmoeA8bWKlqmDvKoKkW84zZO3p2XkL6hIpBKjRnCj7k=
=WUmp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: