On Saturday 24 May 2008, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
--cut--
> > Of course at first is not easy. But we should go to an scenario
> > where all the local patches was reported to upstream (to apply them
> > in the next release) or be justified by more than one dev
retitle 472706 ITA: bdfresize -- Resize BDF Format Font
owner 472706 !
thanks
I'm going to adopt the bdfresize package. My packages bitmap-mule
and xfonts-jisx0213 depend on it.
Thanks,
--
Tatsuya Kinoshita
pgp9xcVzQmQxr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le Sat, May 24, 2008 at 01:38:27AM +0100, Don Armstrong a écrit :
>
> We need the people who are doing the review and have continuously
> committed to doing the review before we block on the review.
Hi all,
peer-reviewed scientific research relies on intermediates to organise
the reviewing proce
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's probably a good plan, especially since the sandbox is apparently
going to be eliminated eventually (and it sounds like arpack and delaunay
are on the list of things like
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
> Is not about accept help. It about considering the package as
> unmaintained if there is not a team to maintain it. In same
> packages, we can not depend on only two pairs of eyes.
If there aren't enough people who are interested in maintaining
packages
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octav
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libdevel-calltrace-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Robert Spier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Jesse Vincent
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.or
El Vie 23 May 2008, Don Armstrong escribió:
> > - It should maintained by a team
>
> Team maintenance doesn't automatically make a package better.[1]
> Furthermore, I don't believe there are many (possibly any!) packages
> in Debian where the package is "important" and the current maintainer
> wou
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
* Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'll no longer be maintaining the following packages. I plan to orphan
> them next week and hope to find new maintainers for them before then.
>
> rss2email
I'll take rss2email if no one else wants to.
--
David Watson - Debian GNU/Linux Developer
[EMAIL
Hi Michael,
Michael Meskes wrote:
> Sorry guys, apparently this email of mine didn't make it to the list.
> Thus sending it again. Need to figure out what's going on as this
> happened twice.
>
> Am Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2008 20:53:51 schrieb Joey Hess:
>> I'll no longer be maintaining the following
Package: wnpp
Owner: Vincent Bernat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: shrewsoft-vpn-client
Version : 2.0.3
Upstream Author : Shrew Soft
* URL or Web page : http://shrew.net/?page=software
* License : other
Description : IPsec client including grap
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 06:03:51PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> So, basically, I welcome your proposal, but IMO its simplest and most
> effective implementation would be: ``packages scoring high in popcon
> have to be maintained by teams using some Vcs-*''.
Why do you want to force the use o
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
> - It should be checked with debugging tools (like valgrind :P)
> - It should a public VCS
These should be encouraged, and in the cases where packages aren't in
a public VCS or QAed properly before upload, the deficiencies should
be politely pointed out
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:21:07PM -0300, Luciano Bello wrote:
> I was thinking about the Debian/OpenSSL debacle. Clearly it not easy to
> manage a hard meticulous QA process in all packages. In the other hand, there
> are packages more critical than others, which are more delicate to secur
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package name: patman
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : Kay Pruefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Udo Stenzel <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
URL : http://bioinf.eva.mpg.de/patman/
License : GPL-2+
Prog
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
>
> > Then you are voting for mercurial if you participated in popcon.
> >
> > vote: number of people who use this package regularly;
>
> Note that the vote is not that reliable either: it needs atime, which is
Hi,
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:05:14PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> Shorter summary of vote data goes as:
>>
>> cvs 5%
>> subversion9%
>> git-core 3%
>> mercurial 0.6%
>> darcs 0.3%
>> bzr 0.3%
>>
> Does monotone not get a mention? or w
26 matches
Mail list logo
