Vincent Bernat ha scritto:
> Seems fine. Uploaded.
Thanks!
Giuseppe.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
OoO En ce début de soirée du samedi 13 septembre 2008, vers 21:46,
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait :
> Uploaded again: http://sd6.iuculano.it/atmailopen/
Seems fine. Uploaded.
--
/*
* For moronic filesystems that do not allow holes in file.
* We may have to extend the fil
Vincent Bernat ha scritto:
> You removed the binary-arch target completely. It is required by the
> policy (for example, for a buildd that only wants to build
> arch-dependent packages because other are built by other buildd).
>
> You should add it back:
>
> binary-arch:
> binar
OoO En cette fin de matinée radieuse du samedi 13 septembre 2008, vers
11:10, Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait :
> Mentors seems down, uploaded here: http://sd6.iuculano.it/atmailopen/
Hi Giuseppe!
You removed the binary-arch target completely. It is required by the
policy (fo
Giuseppe Iuculano ha scritto:
> I think that you can. Those templates are unlikely to change until the
>> upload is ready.
>
> Done.
>
Uploaded again with new debconf translation.
Mentors seems down, uploaded here: http://sd6.iuculano.it/atmailopen/
Giuseppe.
signature.asc
Description: O
Vincent Bernat ha scritto:
> You can also just exclude all those files from orig.tar.gz. In this
> case, put "dfsg" somewhere in the version string (1.02+svn48.dfsg-1) for
> example. And you should add a note in README.source on how to get the
> source package from SVN (and, better, ad
OoO En cette soirée bien amorcée du jeudi 28 août 2008, vers 22:29,
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait :
>> Somefiles haveadifferent license.Forexample,
>> libs/Atmail/spellChecker.php. The license given as URL is non-free. You
>> will need to work wit
Hi Vincent,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Somefiles haveadifferent license.Forexample,
> libs/Atmail/spellChecker.php. The license given as URL is non-free. You
> will need to work with upstream to sort this out. Check all files
> individually. The license which is i
OoO En cette nuit striée d'éclairs du lundi 21 juillet 2008, vers 02:30,
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait :
>> You introduce a debconf templates. I see that you already have some
>> translations. However, I don't find your call for translations. Until
>> lenny is released, th
Hi Vincent,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Hi Giuseppe!
>
> Somefiles haveadifferent license.Forexample,
> libs/Atmail/spellChecker.php. The license given as URL is non-free. You
> will need to work with upstream to sort this out. Check all files
> individually. The
OoO En cette fin de matinée radieuse du samedi 05 juillet 2008, vers
11:52, Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait :
> * Package name: atmailopen
> Version : 1.01-1
> Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.atmail.org/
> * License
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I meant that from the server admin's point of view, it he who will
> be installing the package, not the users.
Right. So, that admin, when she's ready to install packages, can
choose to use a package tool like aptitude that will display all the
d
Ben Finney wrote:
> Eduardo M KALINOWSKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>>
>>> Debian developers reference suggest not no put "written in
>>> " into one-line descriptions - it is useless for users
>>> to know what language the program written in.
>>>
>>
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> > Debian developers reference suggest not no put "written in
> > " into one-line descriptions - it is useless for users
> > to know what language the program written in.
>
> In this particular case, it actually can be
Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> > Description: elegant and intuitive ajax webmail client written in php
> [snip]
> > Kind regards
> > Giuseppe Iuculano
>
>
> Debian developers reference suggest not no put "written in "
> into one-line
> descriptions - it is useless for users to know what language the
Ben Finney ha scritto:
> Seems fine, except for all the references to PHP; you should remove
> all of them. Once the package is in Debian, you can use debtags to
> classify things like implementation language.
Uploaded with this new description:
Description: elegant and intuitive ajax webmail cli
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Description: elegant and intuitive ajax webmail client written in php
> AtMail is a webmail client written in PHP. It aim to provide
> an elegant Ajax webmail client for existing IMAP mailservers, with less bloat
> and a focus on an intuitive, sim
Eugene V. Lyubimkin ha scritto:
> Debian developers reference suggest not no put "written in " into
> one-line
> descriptions - it is useless for users to know what language the program
> written in.
>
Removed, thanks. New synopsis is:
Description: elegant and intuitive ajax webmail client
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
IANADD
Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
>
> * Package name: atmailopen
> Version : 1.01-1
> Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.atmail.org/
> *
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
* Package name: atmailopen
Version : 1.01-1
Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.atmail.org/
* License : Apache License Version 2.0
Section : web
Descri
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think now it should be fixed, reuploaded.
Since many prospective sponsors will want to see the description as it
stands now, you should probably send another RFS message with the
updated description.
> (I'm sorry for duplicate email, I forgot to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ben Finney wrote:
> The synopsis (short one-line package description) should not be
> capitalised like the start of a sentence. Nor should it begin with an
> article like "a" or "an". Please refer to
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-
Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
>
> * Package name: atmailopen
> Version : 1.01-1
> Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.atmail.org/
> * License
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
* Package name: atmailopen
Version : 1.01-1
Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.atmail.org/
* License : Apache License Version 2.0
Section : web
Descri
Giuseppe Iuculano ha scritto:
>
> First I tried tu use debian pear linking /usr/share/php to
> /usr/share/atmailopen/libs/PEAR, but
> unfortunately atmail doesn't work, just a white page...
Ok, fix the issue, now atmailopen uses PEAR in /usr/share/php and depends also
on php-date,
php-mail, php
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
First I tried tu use debian pear linking /usr/share/php to
/usr/share/atmailopen/libs/PEAR, but unfortunately atmail doesn't work,
just a white page...
Usually the PHP error log can show the problems here; perhaps you can turn
up the debug level
Hi Laszlo,
Laszlo Boszormenyi ha scritto:
> Just a quick checking:
> - You duplicate php-date, php-mail, php-net-smtp, php-net-ldap and
> php-net-socket packages inside your pacakge. This is a security
> nightmare. Can't you just depend on those packages?
First I tried tu use debian pear lin
Hi Giuseppe,
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 13:17 +0200, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
>
> * Package name: atmailopen
> Version : 1.01-1
> Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.atmail.org/
> * Licen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atmailopen".
* Package name: atmailopen
Version : 1.01-1
Upstream Author : @Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.atmail.org/
* License : Apache Licens
29 matches
Mail list logo
