Re: openjdk-6_6b08-1_i386.changes REJECTED

2008-04-19 Thread Joerg Jaspert
On 11360 March 1977, Matthias Klose wrote: Good, as long as it stays within the same source its ok. > From my point of view interpretation of policy doesn't belong to NEW > processing. Luckily your view doesnt matter for NEW. It is one central part of NEW to see if the stuff fits the archive, an

Re: openjdk-6_6b08-1_i386.changes REJECTED

2008-04-18 Thread Joerg Jaspert
On 11360 March 1977, Matthias Klose wrote: >> While you're doing stuff, you could also get rid of >> - substvar-source-version-is-deprecated > thanks for the hint, but this doesn't belong into a reject message. It sure does not warrant an own mail and fits perfectly well if one is writing anyways

java-common_0.28_i386.changes REJECTED

2008-03-05 Thread Joerg Jaspert
Hi Maintainer, rejected, lots of E: default-jdk: no-copyright-file E: default-jdk: debian-changelog-file-missing-or-wrong-name Additionally you might want to listen/talk to others in the java team, which have concerns about the package, just asking me about it... -- bye Joerg === If you do

java-wrappers_0.1_amd64.changes REJECTED

2008-02-22 Thread Joerg Jaspert
see previous reject please === If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the override file requires editing, reply to this email. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]