Re: RFS: tacacs+

[Tourneur Henry-Nicolas]

On Friday 05 February 2010 13:39:18 Craig Small wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Tourneur Henry-Nicolas wrote:
> > I just did so and normally, I should have fixed all of the lintian Errors
> > and Warnings. Could somebody review my package again ?
> >
> > Thanks everybody for taking time to help me.
> 
> I was wondering why you have put the binaries into /usr/bin and not
> /usr/sbin. Both are not programs standard users run.
>   tac_plus is the TACACS+ daemon and has a man page in section 8
>   tac_pwd is used by system administrators to make DES passwords to put
> into the configuration file. Again it has a section 8 man pages.
> 
> To me this sort of stuff belongs in /usr/sbin.
> 
>  - Craig
> 
New version uploaded with those binaries in /usr/sbin. Thanks for the comment.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[David D Lowe]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2-3 of my package
"ooo-thumbnailer".

It builds these binary packages:
ooo-thumbnailer - thumbnailer for OpenOffice.org documents

I'm the upstream author. The work is licensed under the GPL v2 or
higher. My motivation in maintaining this package is to see
OpenOffice.org documents, spreadsheets and presentations thumbnailed
alongside PDFs. Windows has this feature, why shouldn't Debian? All it
takes is a simple bash script.

I followed Jakub Wilk's advice and improved the package since 0.2-1.
I've removed build dependencies on Python, removed unofficial fields
from debian/control, and removed a redundant dependency on
graphics-imagemagick-compat. The package appears to be lintian clean.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer/ooo-thumbnailer_0.2-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I am not
subscribed to the mailing list, so please CC me.

Kind regards

David D Lowe



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: how to compare versions

[Goswin von Brederlow]

"Wesley J. Landaker"  writes:

> On Friday 05 February 2010 04:43:05 Hideki Yamane wrote:
>> > This is true in general, although it's perhaps worth noting that a rare
>> > pre- depends on a priority required package like debconf by a priority
>> > optional or extra package isn't likely to cause any trouble.
>> 
>>  Yes, it is true in general but I want to know the example for that :)
>>  For example, if I have foobar package and it says "Pre-Depends:
>>  debconf", what would happen?
>
> Short answer: nothing, it would work fine in practice.
>
> Long answer:
>
> Debconf would be required to be fully unpacked and configured before foobar 
> could even be unpacked. But, since debconf is priority "required", and is 
> already depended on by so many other packages that it's infeasible that it 
> won't already be completely installed, the pre-depends would be a no-op. In 
> the rare case that debconf wasn't already installed, it would simply be 
> unpacked and configured first, which might slow down the resolver (and hence 
> installation) but otherwise would be no problem.
>
> However, it is possible that you can dream up a bizarre corner case where 
> you are pre-depending on a specific version, your doing a big dist-upgrade, 
> the foobar package has a pre-depends and so do a bunch of other packages 
> that are intertwined in foobar's dependency graph, and the whole thing 
> explodes in a big unresolvable mess.
>
> The last paragraph is incredibly unlikely for just foobar pre-depending on 
> debconf that's you'd have to come up with some silly scenerio to show it 
> breaking, but if pre-depends were used all over the place on lots of 
> packages, that kind of scenerio could happen really quickly, which is why 
> they are generally to be avoided.

The graph doesn't even have to be that big. It just has to have a
depends/pre-depends/conflicts circle like:

debconf Conflicts: whiptail (<< 0.51.4-11)
whiptailDepends: libc6 (>= 2.2.5)
libc6   Conflicts: foo (<< 1.2-3)
foo Pre-Depends: debconf (>= 1.5.28)

If you have foo 1.2-3 installed with an old libc6 (< 2.2.5) things blow
up and foo has to be removed temporary.

But since now that we have Breaks it is far less likely to have such a
Conflicts from a lib to one of its reverse dependencies. With Breaks foo
would only be deconfigured, then debconf can be upgraded and configured
and last foo is upgraded and configured.

>
> I think the general idea is:
>
>   1) Don't use pre-depends.
>   2) No, really, don't use pre-depends.
>   2) Don't use pre-depends unless it's the best technical solution.
>
> =)

What he says.

MfG
Goswin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ceph

[Sage Weil]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2010, Sage Weil wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I am looking for a sponsor for ceph.  Ceph is a distributed object store and
> > file system designed for scalability, reliability, and performance. The
> > kernel module for mounting the file system is planned for inclusion in
> > 2.6.34.
> 
> Hi! That's one awesome package. I'm very busy of late, but I hope you're
> looking into DebianMaintainer status -- have you read
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMaintainer ?
> 
> It'd be perfect for your situation as you're the upstream as well.

I was actually looking at the New Maintainer/Debian Developer process, but 
becoming a Debian Maintainer would also serve my immediate purposes for 
this package.  Ultimately I hope to be able to build and upload new 
versions of the package when they are released, but finding a sponsor is 
the first step.  I've spent a fair amount of time putting the package 
together, but I'm sure there are issues or improvements that can be made.

I'm also interested in becoming a Debian Developer.  My company, DreamHost 
web hosting, is a long time debian user, and we maintain a large number of 
packages internally that could be contributed upstream (perl modules and 
such).  One way or another, I'd like to see the packaging work we do 
internally get contributed back to the community.

> It's most helpful for this list if you post a link to a .dsc file you want us
> to review.

http://ceph.newdream.net/debian/dists/unstable/main/source/ceph_0.18git20100204164957.dsc

Thanks-
sage


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ceph

[Asheesh Laroia]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Sage Weil wrote:


On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Asheesh Laroia wrote:

On Fri, 5 Feb 2010, Sage Weil wrote:

Hello,

I am looking for a sponsor for ceph.  Ceph is a distributed object store and
file system designed for scalability, reliability, and performance. The
kernel module for mounting the file system is planned for inclusion in
2.6.34.


Hi! That's one awesome package. I'm very busy of late, but I hope you're
looking into DebianMaintainer status -- have you read
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMaintainer ?

It'd be perfect for your situation as you're the upstream as well.


I was actually looking at the New Maintainer/Debian Developer process, but
becoming a Debian Maintainer would also serve my immediate purposes for
this package.  Ultimately I hope to be able to build and upload new
versions of the package when they are released, but finding a sponsor is
the first step.  I've spent a fair amount of time putting the package
together, but I'm sure there are issues or improvements that can be made.


For your package, I'll take a look right now. Some feedback:

First of all, you've made it a native package. 
http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html covers that. 
Debian etiquette prefers that you separate your packaging metadata 
(debian/*) from the rest of the source.


An explanation: "The problem is that at some point, upstream's debian 
directory will deviate from the one in the Debian package -- because the 
maintainer changes, the directory was already outdated, or someone does an 
NMU or a security upload. The .diff.gz will now be a diff between the two 
debian dirs, which is very confusing." 



(Honestly I think Debian should work on improving the situation for 
upstream maintainers who want to put debian/* in their version control 
systems, but right now I suggest separating them out. Since you're using 
git, one thing you can do is keep a separate git branch with your debian/ 
directory, and ship your standard release tarballs without it.)


The package begins to build fine in a clean sid i386 pbuilder, but the 
build ends in errors. See my attached text file for the end of the log. 
Feel free to ask me for help setting up a pbuilder if you run into trouble 
with it.


You're also missing a Debian version number, like 
ceph-0.18git20100204164957-1.


I'm also interested in becoming a Debian Developer.  My company, 
DreamHost web hosting, is a long time debian user, and we maintain a 
large number of packages internally that could be contributed upstream 
(perl modules and such).  One way or another, I'd like to see the 
packaging work we do internally get contributed back to the community.


Awesome!

My personal process for becoming a Debian developer was that I maintained 
some packages and got sponsors via this list, and while I was doing that I 
applied for DebianMaintainer status and Debian Developer status at the 
same time. DM status came much more quickly, which helped me get my 
packages uploaded faster while I was waiting for DD status.


So that's what I suggest for everyone these days.

Both DM and DD require a recommendation (advocacy) from someone who has 
worked with you. If I sponsor your packages, I'm happy to write a note for 
either or both.


-- Asheesh.mkdir -p /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/usr/include/rados
/bin/bash /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/install-sh -c -m 0644 
osdc/librados.h /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git2010
0204164957/usr/include/rados/librados.h
mkdir -p /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/usr/include/crush
/bin/bash /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/install-sh -c -m 0644 
crush/hash.h /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git2010020
4164957/usr/include/crush/hash.h
/bin/bash /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/install-sh -c -m 0644 
crush/crush.h /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git201002
04164957/usr/include/crush/crush.h
/bin/bash /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/install-sh -c -m 0644 
crush/types.h /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git201002
04164957/usr/include/crush/types.h
/bin/bash /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/install-sh -c -m 0644 
crush/mapper.h /tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100
204164957/usr/include/crush/mapper.h
make[4]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/src'
make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/src'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/src'
Making install in man
make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/man'
make[3]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/man'
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-exec-am'.
test -z "/usr/share/man/man8" || /bin/mkdir -p 
"/tmp/buildd/ceph-0.18git20100204164957/usr/share/man/man8"
 /usr/bin/install -c -m 644 cosd.8 cmds.8 cmon.8 mkcephfs.8 mkmonfs.8 cfuse.8 
csyn.8 crushtool.8 osdmaptool.8 monma
ptool.8 cconf.8 crun.8 ceph.8 mount.ceph.8 radosgw.8 radosgw_admin.8 cosd.8 
cmds.8 cmon.8 mkcephfs.8 mkmonf

RFS: bluemindo (updated package)

[Thibaut GIRKA]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3-3
of my package "bluemindo".

It builds these binary packages:
bluemindo  - simple yet powerful audio player

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 560986

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/bluemindo
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main 
contrib non-free
- dget 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/bluemindo/bluemindo_0.3-3.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 Thibaut GIRKA


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[Asheesh Laroia]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, David D Lowe wrote:


Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.2-3 of my package
"ooo-thumbnailer".

It builds these binary packages:
ooo-thumbnailer - thumbnailer for OpenOffice.org documents

I'm the upstream author. The work is licensed under the GPL v2 or
higher. My motivation in maintaining this package is to see
OpenOffice.org documents, spreadsheets and presentations thumbnailed
alongside PDFs. Windows has this feature, why shouldn't Debian? All it
takes is a simple bash script.

I followed Jakub Wilk's advice and improved the package since 0.2-1.
I've removed build dependencies on Python, removed unofficial fields
from debian/control, and removed a redundant dependency on
graphics-imagemagick-compat. The package appears to be lintian clean.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer/ooo-thumbnailer_0.2-1.dsc


404 Not Found

Presuming you meant 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer/ooo-thumbnailer_0.2-3.dsc 
and continuing with review...


Well, it builds clean in a pbuilder! Pretty simple package. Let me try 
it


I installed it, and it doesn't seem to thumbnail my spreadsheet in 
Nautilus. Maybe I need to restart Nautilus? /me tries that


Oh SWEET! There we go. (-:

Can you make a note explaining that in README.Debian?

Also, I'm just wondering: why did you remove the dependency on "bash"? 
Maybe I'm being silly, but I figure it does really depend on it.


(Other Debian mentors -- is it okay to upload a package whose version is 
0.2-3 or 0.2-4 as the first Debian upload? Or should we instead rewrite 
history and pretend this is 0.2-1 when it's ready to go?)


So far, so good -- keep me posted about those two questions, and once I'm 
satisfied, I'll foist this upon the NEW queue.


-- Asheesh.

--
I'm having a BIG BANG THEORY!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[Christoph Egger]

On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 03:48:08PM -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> 
> Also, I'm just wondering: why did you remove the dependency on
> "bash"? Maybe I'm being silly, but I figure it does really depend on
> it.

bash is Essential and you don't explicitely depend on essential
packages but assume it's there anyway.

> (Other Debian mentors -- is it okay to upload a package whose
> version is 0.2-3 or 0.2-4 as the first Debian upload? Or should we
> instead rewrite history and pretend this is 0.2-1 when it's ready to
> go?)

There are some of the sponsors around demanding to increase the
debian version for every change of a package that hit mentors and
others that want a version just after the one in the archive.

Cheers

Christoph

-- 
/"\  ASCII Ribbon : GPG-Key ID: 0xD49AE731
\ /Campaign   : CaCert Assurer
 X   against HTML : Debian Maintainer
/ \   in eMails   : http://www.debian.org/

http://www.christoph-egger.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: bluemindo (updated package)

[Christoph Egger]

On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 09:44:26PM +0100, Thibaut GIRKA wrote:
> - dget 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/bluemindo/bluemindo_0.3-3.dsc
> 
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

done. YOu might want to get rid of the dh_clean override using a
debian/clean file btw ;)

Regards

Christoph

-- 
/"\  ASCII Ribbon : GPG-Key ID: 0xD49AE731
\ /Campaign   : CaCert Assurer
 X   against HTML : Debian Maintainer
/ \   in eMails   : http://www.debian.org/

http://www.christoph-egger.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[Kumar Appaiah]

On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 03:48:08PM -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> (Other Debian mentors -- is it okay to upload a package whose version is  
> 0.2-3 or 0.2-4 as the first Debian upload? Or should we instead rewrite  
> history and pretend this is 0.2-1 when it's ready to go?)

The short answer is, yes. There is no absolute necessity to use
-1, unless you find "appearing-to-start-from-clean-slate"
too important.

Kumar
-- 
/*
 * Please skip to the bottom of this file if you ate lunch recently
 * -- Alan
 */
-- from Linux kernel pre-2.1.91-1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[Asheesh Laroia]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Christoph Egger wrote:


On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 03:48:08PM -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:


Also, I'm just wondering: why did you remove the dependency on
"bash"? Maybe I'm being silly, but I figure it does really depend on
it.


bash is Essential and you don't explicitely depend on essential
packages but assume it's there anyway.


bash is still Essential? Man, that's lame. (-;

(Other Debian mentors -- is it okay to upload a package whose version 
is 0.2-3 or 0.2-4 as the first Debian upload? Or should we instead 
rewrite history and pretend this is 0.2-1 when it's ready to go?)


	There are some of the sponsors around demanding to increase the 
debian version for every change of a package that hit mentors and others 
that want a version just after the one in the archive.


So either way is okay, then.

-- Asheesh.

--
Parents often talk about the younger generation as if they didn't have
much of anything to do with it.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: bluemindo (updated package)

[Joachim Wiedorn]

Hello,

Thibaut GIRKA  wrote:
> It builds these binary packages:
> bluemindo  - simple yet powerful audio player

I am not an DD, but I have tested build your package on Debian Lenny.

Then on Lenny I can start bluemindo, but I do not get a GUI. I am only get
a message (7x):

> (bluemindo.py:5944): libglade-WARNING **: unknown property `accel_path' for 
> class `GtkRadioMenuItem'

Do you know where the problem could be?

Fondest regards,
 Joachim Wiedorn



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: RFS: bluemindo (updated package)

[Thibaut GIRKA]

Le samedi 06 février 2010 à 22:37 +0100, Joachim Wiedorn a écrit :

> Then on Lenny I can start bluemindo, but I do not get a GUI. I am only get
> a message (7x):
> 
> > (bluemindo.py:5944): libglade-WARNING **: unknown property `accel_path' for 
> > class `GtkRadioMenuItem'
> 
> Do you know where the problem could be?

Hm... That's just a guess, but do you have a notification area? If not,
try to edit (or create) ~/.config/bluemindo/modules/player.cfg to have
"startminimized" in the "[Player]" section.


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[David D Lowe]

On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 15:48 -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> Presuming you meant 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer/ooo-thumbnailer_0.2-3.dsc
>  
> and continuing with review...
> 
Yes, indeed, my mistake.

> Well, it builds clean in a pbuilder! Pretty simple package. Let me try 
> it
> 
> I installed it, and it doesn't seem to thumbnail my spreadsheet in 
> Nautilus. Maybe I need to restart Nautilus? /me tries that
> 
> Oh SWEET! There we go. (-:
> 
> Can you make a note explaining that in README.Debian?
> 
Will do.

> Also, I'm just wondering: why did you remove the dependency on "bash"? 
> Maybe I'm being silly, but I figure it does really depend on it.
> 
Jakub Wilk (not a DD) recommended I do so. I quote: "Dependency on 'bash
(>=3)' could be dropped, as even oldstable has the requested version of
bash, and bash is essential."

Thanks,
David D Lowe



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: bluemindo (updated package)

[Joachim Wiedorn]

Hello,

Thibaut GIRKA  wrote:
> Hm... That's just a guess, but do you have a notification area? If not,
> try to edit (or create) ~/.config/bluemindo/modules/player.cfg to have
> "startminimized" in the "[Player]" section.

Now I have tested it also on Squeeze and then I have found the Icon 
in my Panel. I think this behaviour is problematic for user who have
installed this program the first time, because you see no
greeting/starting window. 


Fondest regards,
 Joachim Wiedorn



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

RFS: django-lean

[Elliot Murphy]

Subject: RFS: django-lean

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "django-lean".

* Package name: django-lean
  Version : 0.1-1
  Upstream Author : Akoha, Inc. 
* URL : http://bitbucket.org/akoha/django-lean/wiki/Home
* License : BSD
  Section : python

It builds these binary packages:
python-django-lean - A framework for performing and analyzing
split-test experiments in django

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 568694

My motivation for maintaining this package is: I am using it myself.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/django-lean
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/django-lean/django-lean_0.1-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
-- 
Elliot Murphy | https://launchpad.net/~statik/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

RFS: xpdf (updated package)

[Michael Gilbert]

Hi,

I have prepared an updated package for xpdf that fixes quite a few
security issues (and a couple cosmetic ones as well).  The package is
available at [0].  Note that I've built updated etch and lenny packages
there as well, which I am getting sponsorship from the security team.
They can be ignored.

Would anyone be willing to sponsor this upload?

Best wishes,
Mike

[0] http://alioth.debian.org/~gilbert-guest/xpdf/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ceph

[Paul Wise]

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Asheesh Laroia  wrote:

> First of all, you've made it a native package.
> http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html covers that.
> Debian etiquette prefers that you separate your packaging metadata
> (debian/*) from the rest of the source.
>
> An explanation: "The problem is that at some point, upstream's debian
> directory will deviate from the one in the Debian package -- because the
> maintainer changes, the directory was already outdated, or someone does an
> NMU or a security upload. The .diff.gz will now be a diff between the two
> debian dirs, which is very confusing."
> 
>
> (Honestly I think Debian should work on improving the situation for upstream
> maintainers who want to put debian/* in their version control systems, but
> right now I suggest separating them out. Since you're using git, one thing
> you can do is keep a separate git branch with your debian/ directory, and
> ship your standard release tarballs without it.)

Upstream keeping debian/ in their tarball is no longer as problematic;
with the dpkg-source 3.0 (quilt) format, dpkg-source deletes the
debian/ dir unpacked from the upstream orig.tar.gz before extracting
the debian.tar.gz, so the upstream debian/ dir is no longer relevant.

Your point about native packages is still valid; it isn't appropriate
for ceph to be a native package because it isn't Debian-specific.

>> I'm also interested in becoming a Debian Developer.  My company, DreamHost
>> web hosting, is a long time debian user, and we maintain a large number of
>> packages internally that could be contributed upstream (perl modules and
>> such).  One way or another, I'd like to see the packaging work we do
>> internally get contributed back to the community.

For the perl modules, I'd strongly suggest the relevant persons join
the Perl team, you'll easily find sponsors, advice, QA and shared
maintainence there.

http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianPerlGroup

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: ooo-thumbnailer

[Asheesh Laroia]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, David D Lowe wrote:


On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 15:48 -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:

Presuming you meant
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ooo-thumbnailer/ooo-thumbnailer_0.2-3.dsc
and continuing with review...


Yes, indeed, my mistake.


Well, it builds clean in a pbuilder! Pretty simple package. Let me try
it

I installed it, and it doesn't seem to thumbnail my spreadsheet in
Nautilus. Maybe I need to restart Nautilus? /me tries that

Oh SWEET! There we go. (-:

Can you make a note explaining that in README.Debian?


Will do.


Also, I'm just wondering: why did you remove the dependency on "bash"?
Maybe I'm being silly, but I figure it does really depend on it.


Jakub Wilk (not a DD) recommended I do so. I quote: "Dependency on 'bash
(>=3)' could be dropped, as even oldstable has the requested version of
bash, and bash is essential."


Agreed -- leave out that dependency.

Ping debian-mentors when you've updated README.Debian!

And keep 
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMaintainer#AdvocatingaDebianMaintainer in 
mind; I'd love to advocate you for DM status once we get to know each 
other well enough.


-- Asheesh.

--
We can defeat gravity.  The problem is the paperwork involved.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org