Re: Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging

Hi Tim, On 24.10.2014 04:09, Potter, Tim (Cloud Services) wrote: [...] > I managed to get all of this done, including the unit tests but ended up > trashing my old repo and overwriting it with a new one. I made a huge > mess of the original sources and redid everything using the upstream > tar.g

Re: Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging

Hi Markus. Apologies for the delay in getting the last couple of fixes in. Here's a highly trimmed list of your suggestions. On 2/10/14 5:21 AM, "Markus Koschany" wrote: >Here a some remarks from my side: >I: jackson-datatype-guava source: debian-watch-file-is-missing >At the moment the sour

Re: Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging

On 2/10/14 5:21 AM, "Markus Koschany" wrote: >Hi Tim, > >On 01.10.2014 03:16, Potter, Tim (Cloud Services) wrote: >> Hi everyone. I've put together my own packaging for the >> jackson-datatype-guava library, based mostly on the >> jackson-datavalue-yaml packaging which seemed pretty similar. Co

Re: Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging

Hi Tim, On 01.10.2014 03:16, Potter, Tim (Cloud Services) wrote: > Hi everyone. I've put together my own packaging for the > jackson-datatype-guava library, based mostly on the > jackson-datavalue-yaml packaging which seemed pretty similar. Could > someone please give it a bit of a review? >

Request for review: jackson-datatype-guava packaging

Hi everyone. I've put together my own packaging for the jackson-datatype-guava library, based mostly on the jackson-datavalue-yaml packaging which seemed pretty similar. Could someone please give it a bit of a review? I couldn't get the unit tests to compile so left them out. Help needed in t

Re: Request for review: jetty8

Hi Brian, We're preparing a release of Eucalyptus for Debian which may or may not make it into the next release, but we are heavily reliant upon jetty6 and would appreciate it if it could stick around a while longer. No problem with this on my side, current jetty8 packaging supports installati

Re: Request for review: jetty8

Hi Jakub, We're preparing a release of Eucalyptus for Debian which may or may not make it into the next release, but we are heavily reliant upon jetty6 and would appreciate it if it could stick around a while longer. Best regards, Brian On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Jakub Adam wrote: > Hi,

Request for review: jetty8

Hi, as a part of preparation process for packaging Eclipse 3.8, we have to make an upload of jetty 8. Current version in Debian sid is 6.1.24-6 [1] that is no longer compatible with upcoming release of Eclipse. I created jetty8 source package in git[2], it allows me to build Eclipse 3.8 and work

Re: Request for review: jtreg

I will take a look at it this evening. tony On 07/06/2011 08:34 AM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > Hello > > I am currently overseas. I don t know when i will be able to upload > it... it would be nice if an other DD could upload it. > > Thanks, > S > > -- > Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9

Re: Request for review: jtreg

Hello I am currently overseas. I don t know when i will be able to upload it... it would be nice if an other DD could upload it. Thanks, S -- Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté. Guillaume Mazoyer a écrit : On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 04:40:22PM +0200, Sylvestre

Re: Request for review: jtreg

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 04:40:22PM +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > I am going to upload it. I sent a -2 version of the package in the SVN. It fixes a typo in a variable name in a patch that I've made. Is it possible to upload it? -- Guillaume Mazoyer - http://respawner.fr/ signature.asc Descr

Re: Request for review: jtreg

Le jeudi 23 juin 2011 à 16:36 +0200, Guillaume Mazoyer a écrit : > Hi, > > I'm looking for people to review a new package: jtreg. > You can find the ITP bug right here: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629577 > > The debian directory to package jtreg can be found in the pkg-java

Request for review: jtreg

Hi, I'm looking for people to review a new package: jtreg. You can find the ITP bug right here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629577 The debian directory to package jtreg can be found in the pkg-java SVN: svn co svn+ssh://${SVNUSER}@svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-java/trunk/jtreg Than

Re: Request for review: jtharness

Le jeudi 02 juin 2011 à 01:06 +0200, Guillaume Mazoyer a écrit : > Hi, > > > I'm looking for people to review a new package jtharness-java. > You can find the ITP bug right here: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=628857 > > > The orig.tar.gz and the debian directory are right

Request for review: jtharness

Hi, I'm looking for people to review a new package jtharness-java. You can find the ITP bug right here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=628857 The orig.tar.gz and the debian directory are right here: http://roku.info9.net/~guillaume/jtharness/

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Hi Benjamin, > On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Benjamin Drung wrote: >> Am Donnerstag, den 26.11.2009, 23:58 +0200 schrieb Tom Feiner: >> I would recommend to change the order to "java6-runtime-headless | >> java5-runtime-headless", so that the default will be >> java6-runtime-headless. >> Rig

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: >> >> I did not mean to suggest that you should remove your current java >> alternatives (default-jre-headless | java2-runtime-headless)[1]; only >> that you extended it to include java5 and java6 as well. Particularly >> all of the javaX-r

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Am Donnerstag, den 26.11.2009, 23:58 +0200 schrieb Tom Feiner: > Hi Niels, > > Thank you very much for the review! > > You were right on all of the assumptions in your reply :) > > I've committed the following change based on your review. Which incorporates > all of your suggetions [1]. I would

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Hi Tom I did not mean to suggest that you should remove your current java alternatives (default-jre-headless | java2-runtime-headless)[1]; only that you extended it to include java5 and java6 as well. Particularly all of the javaX-runtime-headless packages are virtual, so you should keep default-j

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Hi Niels, Thank you very much for the review! You were right on all of the assumptions in your reply :) I've committed the following change based on your review. Which incorporates all of your suggetions [1]. Thanks a lot :) Tom Feiner [1] http://munin.projects.linpro.no/changeset/3114

Re: munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Tom Feiner wrote: > Hi, > > I hope I'm asking this is the right place. > Hi Yupe, this is the right place. BTW, I assumed that you were reachable via the Munin Maintainer List, since you did not ask to be explicitly CCed. > I'm working with the debian munin maintainers [1] to package the > upc

munin-java-plugins package - request for review

Hi, I hope I'm asking this is the right place. I'm working with the debian munin maintainers [1] to package the upcoming version of munin. Munin is a network monitoring system, which is extended by plugins to monitor different aspects of the OS and running applications. Recently, the upstream pr

Re: Request for review

Hello, On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote: Should I change: Build-Depends-Indep: default-jdk to: Build-Depends-Indep: default-jdk-builddep Well, currently default-jdk-builddep => default-jdk, so it's pretty irrelevant, but yeah, it's probably a good idea fixed in r8116

Re: Request for review

On Wed Mar 25 16:40, Dominik Smatana wrote: >> Also, I think the recommended depend >> is actually default-jdk-builddep (I always forget that). > > Should I change: > Build-Depends-Indep: default-jdk > to: > Build-Depends-Indep: default-jdk-builddep Well, currently default-jdk-builddep => default-

Re: Request for review

Hello, On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote: You still don't explicitly set which javac and jar program you are using. You must use /usr/lib/jvm/default-jdk/bin/javac instead of javac (or whichever path you are using). Things like javahelper make this easy, since you can jus

Re: Request for review

On Wed Mar 25 19:53, Onkar Shinde wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote: > > On Wed Mar 25 18:17, Onkar Shinde wrote: > >> > You still don't explicitly set which javac and jar program you are > >> > using. You must use /usr/lib/jvm/default-jdk/bin/javac instead of javac >

Re: Request for review

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Wed Mar 25 18:17, Onkar Shinde wrote: >> > You still don't explicitly set which javac and jar program you are >> > using. You must use /usr/lib/jvm/default-jdk/bin/javac instead of javac >> > (or whichever path you are using). Also, I th

Re: Request for review

On Wed Mar 25 18:17, Onkar Shinde wrote: > > You still don't explicitly set which javac and jar program you are > > using. You must use /usr/lib/jvm/default-jdk/bin/javac instead of javac > > (or whichever path you are using). Also, I think the recommended depend > > is actually default-jdk-buildde

Re: Request for review

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Tue Mar 24 18:53, Dominik Smatana wrote: >> > For the dependency on the library we are now requesting that >> > libraries do not depend on runtimes at all. >> >> Fixed in r8112, I think "Debian policy for Java" ( >> http://www.debian.org

Re: Request for review

On Tue Mar 24 18:53, Dominik Smatana wrote: > > For the dependency on the library we are now requesting that > > libraries do not depend on runtimes at all. > > Fixed in r8112, I think "Debian policy for Java" ( > http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x105.html ) > should be upda

Re: Request for review

Hello, On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Mon Mar 23 23:51, Dominik Smatana wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'd like to get my package png-sixlegs >> (svn://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-java/trunk/png-sixlegs/) reviewed by >> potential sponsor. > > Hi, I've had a look at the stuff in

Re: Request for review

On Mon Mar 23 23:51, Dominik Smatana wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to get my package png-sixlegs > (svn://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-java/trunk/png-sixlegs/) reviewed by > potential sponsor. Hi, I've had a look at the stuff in svn. You should not have an alternate build dep, they don't work properly

Request for review

Hello, I'd like to get my package png-sixlegs (svn://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-java/trunk/png-sixlegs/) reviewed by potential sponsor. I definitely need some feedback before continuing to work. Package is uploaded at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/png-sixlegs too, but I'm not sure if