On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 12:21 +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Neil Williams wrote:
> > Why is this double space seen as mandatory? - it is not. Single spacing
> > is fine in most cases.
>
> roumors has it that some automatic tools are in need of having two
> leading spaces.
This is way too vague, be
> at the upstream site, the patch is advertised as:
> "Updated Templates for version 5.1.3 - Martin Kos (updated Patch against
> 5.1.3 english)"
>
> This looks like it is a sqwebmail derivation with additional,
> translation related copyright of the patch author. I'd say you try now
> to contact
Willi Mann wrote:
> that the patch doesn't contain an explicit copyright notice. Is the way
> I've done it Ok?
at the upstream site, the patch is advertised as:
"Updated Templates for version 5.1.3 - Martin Kos (updated Patch against
5.1.3 english)"
This looks like it is a sqwebmail derivation wi
Neil Williams wrote:
> Why is this double space seen as mandatory? - it is not. Single spacing
> is fine in most cases.
roumors has it that some automatic tools are in need of having two
leading spaces. look at policy, as long as it is not "fixed" there, it
should be kept as it is (with two leadin
On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 09:05:47 +0100
Daniel Baumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Before Hompepage:, there must be two leading spaces, not just one.
I think this has been covered before and I can't see why it's
continued. One space before Homepage is fine - two spaces just prevents
linewrapping
Daniel Baumann schrieb:
> Daniel Baumann wrote:
>> Going now to bed, will take care tomorrow.
>
> ok, here we go:
done, except
> * debian/copyright is a bit strange formated, and there is no full
> GPL blurb. look at e.g. libquicktime in experimental how to do it
> right.
that the pat
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Going now to bed, will take care tomorrow.
ok, here we go:
* '* Old changelog entries just for history.' is not needed in
changelog, we do always keep the old changelog, even if the package
was completely remade.
* remove the useless empty line at the end of
Willi Mann wrote:
> I'm searching a sponsor for the my completely redone sqwebmail-de
> package. The current version in sid is very outdated: You cannot even
> send mail (with current sqwebmail in sid).
I was wanting that for so long, but didn't reserved the time to do it
myself, or in other words
Hi!
I'm searching a sponsor for the my completely redone sqwebmail-de
package. The current version in sid is very outdated: You cannot even
send mail (with current sqwebmail in sid).
I've redone the packaging completely, because the current build
procedure is so simple that I didn't want to bothe
9 matches
Mail list logo
