Re: Requesting package review for libti*, tilp, gfm

2012-09-03 Thread Bart Martens
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:19:50AM +, Bart Martens wrote: > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 02:29:20PM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Bart Martens wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 11:36:50AM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > > > > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.deb

Re: Requesting package review for libti*, tilp, gfm

2012-09-03 Thread Bart Martens
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 02:29:20PM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Bart Martens wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 11:36:50AM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > > > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libticables I had a look at libticables uploaded to men

Processed: retitle to RFS: aseprite/0.9.5-1 [ITP] -- sprite and pixel art editor

2012-09-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 675806 RFS: aseprite/0.9.5-1 [ITP] -- sprite and pixel art editor Bug #675806 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: aseprite/0.9.2-1 [ITP] -- sprite and pixel art editor Changed Bug title to 'RFS: aseprite/0.9.5-1 [ITP] -- sprite and pixel art edi

Re: debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread The Wanderer
On 09/03/2012 06:04 PM, Roger Leigh wrote: On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 05:30:42PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: On 09/03/2012 02:56 PM, Igor Pashev wrote: I can also suggest to use *-stamp: such files will be removed by dh_clean automatically :-) From what I can see, the stamp-* files seem to be

Re: debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread Roger Leigh
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 05:30:42PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > On 09/03/2012 02:56 PM, Igor Pashev wrote: > > >03.09.2012 21:53, Arno Töll пишет: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>On 03.09.2012 18:55, The Wanderer wrote: > >> > >>>I have not been able to find any documentation on these stamp-* targets, > >>>a

Re: debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread The Wanderer
On 09/03/2012 02:56 PM, Igor Pashev wrote: 03.09.2012 21:53, Arno Töll пишет: Hi, On 03.09.2012 18:55, The Wanderer wrote: I have not been able to find any documentation on these stamp-* targets, although searching has revealed that they or something like them appear to be (or to have been

Processed: Close ITP

2012-09-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 671731 Bug #671731 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: leechcraft/0.5.70+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- modular internet-client Marked Bug as done > close 671732 Bug #671732 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: qxmpp-lc/0.3.61-1 [ITP] -- library for Jabber/XMPP clients M

Re: debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread Igor Pashev
03.09.2012 21:53, Arno Töll пишет: > Hi, > > On 03.09.2012 18:55, The Wanderer wrote: >> I have not been able to find any documentation on these stamp-* targets, >> although searching has revealed that they or something like them appear >> to be >> (or to have been) used in a number of other packa

Re: Requesting package review for libti*, tilp, gfm

2012-09-03 Thread Albert Huang
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Bart Martens wrote: > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 11:36:50AM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libticables > > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libticonv > > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/pack

Re: debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread Arno Töll
Hi, On 03.09.2012 18:55, The Wanderer wrote: > I have not been able to find any documentation on these stamp-* targets, > although searching has revealed that they or something like them appear > to be > (or to have been) used in a number of other packages as well. What are > they used > for, and

debian/rules stamp-* targets

2012-09-03 Thread The Wanderer
I'm attempting to rework the removed e16 package to sumbit it for reinclusion. The debian/rules file for the old version of this package contains the targets 'debian/stamp-build' and 'debian/stamp-install', and includes debian/builddir.mk, which contains the target 'debian/stamp-tarcopy'. These t

Re: Requesting package review for libti*, tilp, gfm

2012-09-03 Thread Bart Martens
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 11:36:50AM -0400, Albert Huang wrote: > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libticables > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libticonv > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/package/libtifiles > *Mentor page:* https://mentors.debian.net/pack

Processed: retitle to RFS: feedgnuplot/1.22 [ITP]

2012-09-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 686417 RFS: feedgnuplot/1.22 [ITP] Bug #686417 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: feedgnuplot/1.20 [ITP] Changed Bug title to 'RFS: feedgnuplot/1.22 [ITP]' from 'RFS: feedgnuplot/1.20 [ITP]' > stop Stopping processing here. Please contact me if

Requesting package review for libti*, tilp, gfm

2012-09-03 Thread Albert Huang
Hello, My packages contain many stability fixes and improvements that I believe will be very beneficial to the TI calculator community. The current packages are very much out of date, incompatible with the current system packages, and very unstable. I feel that I would be doing the TI calculator c

Bug#684106: marked as done (RFS: ledgersmb/1.3.21-2)

2012-09-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Mon, 3 Sep 2012 09:39:51 +0200 with message-id <20120903073951.ga3...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com> and subject line Re: New LedgerSMB Debian package, v1.3.21-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #684106, regarding RFS: ledgersmb/1.3.21-2 to be marked as done. This means that you clai