As I forgot to CC the ITP bug to the list I want to do this now afterwards and include a question:
The bugreport is http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=531587 After an initial view on the package Charles Plessy suggested to rename the package to avoid confusion with the existing package "tasks". I have done this now after getting in touch with the upstream project (actually I contributed to project). The upstream maintainers are planning to rename the project in the future to "taskwarrior" and it is OK to use this name already for the debian package. So the renamed package is now called taskwarrior and has been uploaded to mentors.debian.org (together with a RFS to the debain.-mentors mailiniglist). To superseed the old upload I increased the version number of the package to 1.7.0-2 while renaming it. I still refer to the original ITP bugreport in the changelog file and explain why the package was renamed. Would that be sufficient? Or should I file a new ITP with the correct packagename or change the subject of the current ITP bugreport by maling cont...@bugs.ddebian.org with the retitle command. Greetings, Federico "Fredde" Hernandez ---- The original bugreport: Subject: ITP: task - An open source, command-line, TODO list manager Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Package name : task Version : 1.7.0 Upstream Author : Paul Beckingham <p...@beckingham.net> URL : http://www.beckingham.net/task.html License : GPLv2+ Description : Task is an open source, command-line, TODO list manager. It is scope-limited to GTD functionality and features: tags, colorful tabular output, reports and graphs, lots of commands, low-level API, abbreviations for all commands and options, multiuser file locking, recurring tasks. Task is based on ideas presented in the todo.sh script found on: http://todotxt.org <http://todotxt.org/>
