On Sat Aug 08 15:18, Torsten Werner wrote:
> I don't think that is true as long as the debian dir doesn't ship java
> code that gets compiled and shipped with the binary packages.
It's part of the build system and the FSF, and others, believe that it
counts (I think)
Matt
--
Matthew Johnson
si
On Sat Aug 08 15:14, Ludovic Claude wrote:
> You can see more details about Maven support in my blog post.
> http://ludovicc.blogspot.com/2009/08/state-of-maven-in-debian.html
>
> mh_make relies on a lot of Java code to extract all information from the
> Maven POM descriptors and the local Maven r
Hello Matthew,
You can see more details about Maven support in my blog post.
http://ludovicc.blogspot.com/2009/08/state-of-maven-in-debian.html
mh_make relies on a lot of Java code to extract all information from the
Maven POM descriptors and the local Maven repository for Debian, so
there's not
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
> I believe /usr/bin/vuze is just a wrapper script. So unless the mail
> class of the application accepts some arguments, I don't think a
> manpage would make any sense.
Every file in /usr/bin should have at least a short manpage (policy
12.1) ex
Onkar Shinde writes:
> I believe /usr/bin/vuze is just a wrapper script. So unless the mail
> class of the application accepts some arguments, I don't think a
> manpage would make any sense.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
Any program in one of the standard binary directories (/bin, /sbin,
Onkar Shinde wrote:
> > W: vuze: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/vuze
[..]
> I believe /usr/bin/vuze is just a wrapper script. So unless the mail
> class of the application accepts some arguments, I don't think a
> manpage would make any sense.
Independent from the policy requirements: As long as
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Fri Aug 07 12:15, Adrian Perez wrote:
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> I am looking for a sponsor and reviewer for the new version 4.2.0.4-1
>> of my package "azureus".
>
> Hi, I've reviewed your upload and I get the following lintian output:
>
> W:
Hi Matthew,
2009/8/8 Matthew Johnson :
> - You've given the debian/ copyright as GPL3 but the rest is GPL2+.
> Aside from the fact I don't like the GPL3, this means the resulting
> binary package is GPL3 and can't be used with other GPL2-only packages.
I don't think that is true as long as th
On Fri Aug 07 12:15, Adrian Perez wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor and reviewer for the new version 4.2.0.4-1
> of my package "azureus".
Hi, I've reviewed your upload and I get the following lintian output:
W: azureus: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
E: azureus: menu-icon-
On Wed Aug 05 11:46, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
> Dear debian-java readers,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "remotetea".
Hi Picca, the package looks very nice, however, I have a few small
queries about it.
- You have set DM-Upload-Allowed: yes in the control file. I would
rat
10 matches
Mail list logo
