[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 9 fully signed off packages * 19 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * psmisc-22.16-1 (i686) * psmisc-22.16-1 (x86_64) * xf86-video-mga-1.4.13-6 (i686) * xf86-video-mga-1.4.13-6 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * dirmngr-1.1.0-4 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.24-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * lvm2-2.02.95-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * openssl-1.0.1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * psmisc-22.16-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * syslinux-4.05-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * dirmngr-1.1.0-4 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * psmisc-22.16-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (8 total) == * neon-0.29.6-4 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nx-common-3.5.0-4 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * proftpd-1:1.3.4a-4 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * xf86-video-mga-1.4.13-6 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * neon-0.29.6-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * nx-common-3.5.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * proftpd-1:1.3.4a-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xf86-video-mga-1.4.13-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (3 total) == * archlinux-keyring-20120303-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * cups-filters-1.0.1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * cups-filters-1.0.1-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (9 total) == * iproute2-3.2.0-3 (i686) * openssh-5.9p1-6 (i686) * iproute2-3.2.0-3 (x86_64) * linux-lts-3.0.24-1 (x86_64) * lvm2-2.02.95-1 (x86_64) * openssh-5.9p1-6 (x86_64) * openssl-1.0.1-1 (x86_64) * syslinux-4.05-4 (x86_64) * namcap-3.2.3-1 (any) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * cups-filters-1.0.1-1 (i686), since 2012-02-17 * cups-filters-1.0.1-1 (x86_64), since 2012-02-17 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 9 signoffs 2. tomegun - 5 signoffs 3. dreisner - 2 signoffs 4. eric - 2 signoffs 5. stephane - 1 signoffs
Am 17.03.2012 09:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
== Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * lvm2-2.02.95-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs
We never get 2 i686 signoffs here (I already signed off after my test VM booted). How do we handle user signoffs with the web-based solution?
[2012-03-17 17:37:44 +0100] Thomas Bächler:
Am 17.03.2012 09:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
== Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * lvm2-2.02.95-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs
We never get 2 i686 signoffs here (I already signed off after my test VM booted). How do we handle user signoffs with the web-based solution?
After a week or so, [testing] users would have opened bug reports if there were any issue; I'd say move it. -- Gaetan
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Gaetan Bisson <bisson@archlinux.org> wrote:
[2012-03-17 17:37:44 +0100] Thomas Bächler:
Am 17.03.2012 09:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
== Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * lvm2-2.02.95-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs
We never get 2 i686 signoffs here (I already signed off after my test VM booted). How do we handle user signoffs with the web-based solution?
After a week or so, [testing] users would have opened bug reports if there were any issue; I'd say move it.
-- Gaetan
I was planning to move it to core later today (Sunday) as it has been in testing for 4 days and not a lot of dev use it.
participants (4)
-
Arch Website Notification
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Gaetan Bisson
-
Thomas Bächler