RFS: spice-protocol (updated package)

2011-07-18 Thread Liang Guo
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.1-1 of my package "spice-protocol". It builds these binary packages: libspice-protocol-dev - SPICE protocol headers The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.deb

Re: RFS: Sponsor needed for pmwiki

2011-07-18 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi Robert, On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 01:35:15PM +0200, Robert Strobl wrote: > Hello Thomas, > > thank you for your feedback. > Some remarks to the following points: > > >* In your debian/postinst script, you are making the assumption that > >there's already apache installed, and a group www-data t

Re: RFS: Sponsor needed for pmwiki

2011-07-18 Thread Robert Strobl
Hello Thomas, thank you for your feedback. Some remarks to the following points: * In your debian/postinst script, you are making the assumption that there's already apache installed, and a group www-data that is created. That might well not be the case, considering your dependencies. www-

Re: RFS: Sponsor needed for pmwiki

2011-07-18 Thread Arno Töll
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, without having looked into the reviewed package, just one further note: On 18.07.2011 12:52, Thomas Goirand wrote: > * In your debian/postinst script, you are making the assumption that > there's already apache installed, and a group www-data tha

Re: RFS: Sponsor needed for pmwiki

2011-07-18 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 07/13/2011 08:49 PM, Robert Strobl wrote: > Hi, > > I just finished updating the package. Sorry for the delay! > I hope that I could realize all your feedback as you wished :) > Please find the updated version at: http://share.gloriabyte.de/pmwiki/ > > Best regards, > Robert Thanks for this.

Re: RFS: taxbird (updated package)

2011-07-18 Thread Olaf Dietsche
Hi Michael, Michael Tautschnig writes: >> Michael Tautschnig writes: >> >> > Could you please briefly explain why you are NMUing this package? Are you >> > intending to take over package maintainership? What about the previous >> > maintainer? >> >> No, I don't want to take over the package.