Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hi Benoît, > Since last comments, I removed notorious-women package by twice > package named : fortunes-nortorious-women and > fortunes-notorious-women-fr according of your advices. > I add a watch file in debian directory and the original tarball > contains now some french and english quotes. > D

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hello, Since last comments, I removed notorious-women package by twice package named : fortunes-nortorious-women and fortunes-notorious-women-fr according of your advices. I add a watch file in debian directory and the original tarball contains now some french and english quotes. Do you make anoth

Re: RFS: notorious-women

On 19 June 2010 00:55, Craig Small wrote: > Getting back on topic, the name isn't too bad, though I do agree a name > like fortunes-fr-*whatever* or fortunes-*whatever*-fr would be better, > assuming that it is a fortune file and the quotes are in french, as > opposed to french women quoted in eng

Re: RFS: notorious-women

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 09:17:52AM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > > Bilal Akhtar wrote: > > Just take the case of my package gnome-media-player. I submitted the RFS > > two months ago, and got a large number of replies, everyone saying "How > > can you use this package name? It is *not* the

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hi, Bilal Akhtar wrote: > Sorry for the damage caused by my message about the package being > "sexist". > > I just wished to point out this to you, since I very well know that, in > order to get packages accepted in Debian, the package name must be > well-formed. It's not only "well-known", it

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Sorry for the damage caused by my message about the package being "sexist". I just wished to point out this to you, since I very well know that, in order to get packages accepted in Debian, the package name must be well-formed. Just take the case of my package gnome-media-player. I submitted the R

Re: RFS: notorious-women

On 06/17/2010 11:21 PM, benoît tuduri wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". The last time you sent this, Joachim Reichel said: [1] > Why is this a separate package at all? Have you contacted the fortunes-fr > maintainer and asked him to include t

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hi, Benoît, On Jun 18 2010, benoît tuduri wrote: > I launched to build my package the debuild command in a command line. > The only errors which are reported for my last upload are : > W: notorious-women: new-package-should-close-itp-bug > W: notorious-women: wrong-bug-number-in-closes l3:# >

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Bilal Akhtar writes: > Isn't this a sexist package? Yes, by definition: it discriminates on the basis of sex. There's nothing wrong with discrimination as such; any act of choosing is an act of discrimination. The more interesting question is: Is it unfairly sexist? I don't think so; it's mere

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hello, Thanks you for your answer. I discovered this mailing list recently because i not see some references on it on mentors.debian.net website. So, I'm working on ubuntu system. Some errors/warning errors are not to be strict. I chrooted a debian sid with debootstrap to be able to notice theses

Re: RFS: notorious-women

On Thursday 17 June 2010 12:51:47 benoît tuduri wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". There have been a number of replies each time you sent this message. Perhaps you are not receiving them. I am CC'ing you on this reply, in case you are not s

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hi Benoît, > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". > > * Package name: notorious-women [...] since this is the third RFS message for this package and most issues pointed out in the initial reply haven't been addressed: When you post repeated RFS messages, can you plea

Re: RFS: notorious-women

On Thursday 17 June 2010 13:16:08 Bilal Akhtar wrote: > Isn't this a sexist package? Sexist against women? Maybe. At the very least, "notorious" has a had a negative denotaion since the 1600s, and probably shouldn't be applied without good justification. I'd prefer a more neutral or positive

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Isn't this a sexist package? Just my 2 cents, Bilal Akhtar. On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 19:51 +0200, benoît tuduri wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". > > * Package name: notorious-women > Version : 0.1-1 > Upstream Author : TUDURI B

RFS: notorious-women

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". * Package name: notorious-women Version : 0.1-1 Upstream Author : TUDURI Benoît * URL : * License : Creative Commons Attribution

Re: RFS: notorious-women

Hi, > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". > > * Package name: notorious-women > Version : 0.1-1 > Upstream Author : TUDURI Benoît > * URL : http://alioth.debian.org/~bent-guest/notorious-women/ > * License : Creative Commons > Attribut

Re: RFS: notorious-women

2010/6/17 benoît tuduri : > * License         : Creative Commons > Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported > >  Section         : games ... > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/notorious-women/notorious-women_0.1-1.ds

RFS: notorious-women

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "notorious-women". * Package name: notorious-women Version : 0.1-1 Upstream Author : TUDURI Benoît * URL : http://alioth.debian.org/~bent-guest/notorious-women/ * License : Creative Commons Attribution-No