On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 09:15:37AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Hi,
> let's restart from scratch, concentrating on the packaging side of the story.
OK, Also added Felipe in CC.
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 22:53, Julien Viard de Galbert
> wrote:
> > Dear mentors and mentees,
> >
> > I am looking fo
Hi,
let's restart from scratch, concentrating on the packaging side of the story.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 22:53, Julien Viard de Galbert
wrote:
> Dear mentors and mentees,
>
> I am looking for reviews for my package "webalizer"
>
> The previous maintainer Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) agreed t
On 01/16/2011 01:24 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:
>
> Maybe our confusion comes from the fact that Jonathan seems to ask
> about a _review_ (and not an upload) and you were already thinking
> about potential spnsorship in the future?
>
Yes, I am making the proposal to be the sponsor, because I need
On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 22:39:53 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/15/2011 03:54 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > I don't agree here; I've seen and been involved in quite a few
> > maintainer handovers that worked perfectly without involving the BTS.
> >
> > Of course if the new maintainer needs a sp
On 01/15/2011 02:02 AM, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> I didn't want to offense you in any way by saying you might not be
> familiar with git. I'm sorry if it sounded like that...
>
Did it sound like I was offended ? I was not! :)
> I see your point with branch names.
> But I don't think there
On 01/15/2011 03:54 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> I don't agree here; I've seen and been involved in quite a few
> maintainer handovers that worked perfectly without involving the BTS.
>
> Of course if the new maintainer needs a sponsor, the sponsor will
> want to see some proof of the old maintaine
On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 00:05:20 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> The way that the previous maintainer would declare that he doesn't
> want to maintain would be a RFA (Request For Adoption).
> The way you would adopt it would be to do an ITA (Intention To Package)
> by renaming his RFA and take-over the
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:05:20AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/14/2011 10:45 PM, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> > Well the maintainer has agreed (on private mail) to give it to me, and
> > I'm planning to ask him to sponsor it so my understanding was that we
> > could avoid the bureaucra
In <4d307440.30...@debian.org>, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>Exactly since when, a private email is an official document for a change
>of maintainership in Debian? What are RFA, O, and ITA for then? I think
>you are mistaking Gregor, it's not enough.
It should be. The bugs types are for when communicat
On 01/14/2011 10:45 PM, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> Well the maintainer has agreed (on private mail) to give it to me, and
> I'm planning to ask him to sponsor it so my understanding was that we
> could avoid the bureaucracy...
>
The way that the previous maintainer would declare that he d
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:45:57 +0100, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> > If you are adopting the package, then you should close a bug for it
> > (the package should be orphaned, then the bug should be renamed as
> > "ITA" (Intention To Adopt), then you should close it in your changelog).
> Well the
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 04:58:37PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
[...]
> Hi,
Hello,
>
> First of all, thanks for your interest in Webalizer. I'm a heavy user
> of it, and it's nice that you seem to want to take over the maintenance
> of this left-over. Let me give few comments...
>
Thanks for loo
On 01/14/2011 05:53 AM, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> Dear mentors and mentees,
>
> I am looking for reviews for my package "webalizer"
>
> The previous maintainer Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) agreed that
> I take over the package, also as he his really busy and this package
> will be target
13 matches
Mail list logo
