mark at msapiro.net
Tue May 5 21:38:13 CEST 2009
Barry S. Finkel wrote:
>There has been some discussion (that I will not quote) about various
>linux Mailman packages. I built a 2.1.12 package for Ubuntu based on
>the SourceForge source and the Debian/Ubuntu 2.1.9 package. At that
>time there were too many Debian patches that were undocumented.
>Last week I decided to look at the Ubuntu 2.1.12 package for the
>"jaunty" release, and I found fewer patches. The patch log file
>mentioned that all of the patches had been reviewed by Mark Sapiro,
>so I assume that the remaining patches are needed to fix bugs. I
>assume that Mark has these remaining patches and will include them in
>the next release of Mailman. I have not yet finished reviewing the
>patches, but the ones I have reviewed look to me like fixes for bugs.
Yes, I did look at the 2.1.11 Debian patch set and send some comments
back to Debian.
I have just looked briefly at the 2.1.12 patch set at
that these URLs are unstable - if this one doesn't work, go to
<http://patch-tracking.debian.net/index/m> and find the current link
in the mailman entry.)
A number of these patches address Debian specific packaging issues and
are not relevant in a generic install from source.
A very few address possible bugs that are obscure and which I didn't
have time to investigate thoroughly before the 2.1.12 release.
At least 1 patch is wrong.
is intended to fix the bug <http://bugs.debian.org/249212>. The bug
report is valid, but the patch doesn't fix it. The patch moves the
wrong thing in the templates.
Some of these patches (including a corrected
64_correct_html_nesting.patch) have already been comitted on the 2.2
branch. Others may be put in 2.2 prior to release, but many of them
simply aren't relevant to the source distribution.
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
More information about the Mailman-Users