Re: #235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

Twas brillig at 20:01:23 31.12.2006 UTC+02 when Eng. Mina Ramses did gyre and gimble: EMR> Anyhow finally we can say that dead upstream requests are out of EMR> interests/needs or even not in a need or require my work on EMR> packaging it and it's better to search for these alternative EMR>

Re: #235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

Anyhow finally we can say that dead upstream requests are out of interests/needs or even not in a need or require my work on packaging it and it's better to search for these alternative packages/Live-requests for a required work. On 12/31/06, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 31

Re: #235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

Even then, there is no guarantee that jing will be accepted into Debian - it is whether you (or the maintainer) can generate sufficient interest in the package on this list or you or the maintainer apply to become a DD yourself and go through that process (currently at least a year). Sponsorship d

Re: #235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 16:34:38 +0200 "Eng. Mina Ramses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: When you start a cross-post, you should keep replies to the list too. > >It was requested to be packaged some time ago (Tue, 02 Mar 2004) but > >no package materialised (it is still an RFP, not an ITP) so the RFP > >

Re: #235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 15:50:54 +0200 "Eng. Mina Ramses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm some bit confused, is > Jingpackaged or is it > requested to be packaged It was requested to be packaged some time ago (Tue, 02 Mar 2004) but no package materialise

#235790 RFP: jing -- A XML RelaxNG validator

I'm some bit confused, is Jingpackaged or is it requested to be packaged , cause already i see a .deb package At the same time I'm posting this message to its bug RFP that has been closed which