Re: RFS: libjibx1.2-java

On 03/12/2014 03:59 PM, Stephen Nelson wrote: > Hi team, > > I am looking for a sponsor for libjibx1.2-java > > * Package name: libjibx1.2-java >Version : 1.2.3-3 Hi Stephen, I made a minor change to debian/copyright, which has been committed to the packaging repo, and have u

RFS: libjibx1.2-java

Hi team, I am looking for a sponsor for libjibx1.2-java * Package name: libjibx1.2-java Version : 1.2.3-3 It builds these binary packages: libjibx-java - Framework for binding XML data to Java objects libjibx1.2-java - Framework for binding XML data to Java objects

Re: State of Jenkins in Debian

Hi Emmanuel, all, [...] > > In any event, I can sympathize and am glad that you're opening the > > discussion. Not everything is going to fit the "stable" distribution > > model - sometimes you need the "freshest bits." > > What about uploading such packages to contrib instead of main? This > co

Re: RFC - more slightly shonky java packages

Hi, Markus Koschany writes: > If you really intend to maintain all of them for the foreseeable future, > I would start with > > libnot-yet-commons-ssl-java > libowasp-antisamy-java > libowasp-esapi-java > libvt-ldap-java > > and prepare them for experimental not unstable. However libraries sho

Re: State of Jenkins in Debian

On 12 March 2014 14:33, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > For the record I pushed the latest version of tomcat7 to > wheezy-backports. I do agree that uploading the new versions of Tomcat > to fix security issues would be much better than backporting the changes > to the version in stable. Tomcat is very s

Re: State of Jenkins in Debian

Le 12/03/2014 05:43, tony mancill a écrit : > In general, for software that has an active upstream already tackling > the problems of frequent updates for security and bug fixes, the user > community might be better served by a PPA or similar. Essentially, > instead of having tomcat-x.y.z be *the