( please honour the explicite set 'Reply-To:' )
Hello Release Team,
The text below is from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
about a Request For Sponsoring.
My questions are at the bottom.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:25:11AM -0500, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
> Geert Stappers wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 0
Geert Stappers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 09:27:06PM -0500,
Reed Snellenberger wrote, in some odd order:
Philipp Kern wrote:
On 23 Apr 2005, at 05:45, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
Files are available at:
http://home.houston.rr.com/snellenberger/debian/sitecopy/
Do you k
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 09:27:06PM -0500,
Reed Snellenberger wrote, in some odd order:
> Philipp Kern wrote:
>
> >On 23 Apr 2005, at 05:45, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
> >
> >>Files are available at:
> >> http://home.houston.rr.com/snellenberger/debian/sitecopy/
> >
> >
> >Do you know why there
Philipp:
Following up on my earlier post, upstream has asked "what do you want me
to do about that old debian directory?", and I asked him to remove it.
Although it's still in place for the 0.15.1 version that he released on
Sunday (May 24), it'll be gone from subsequent releases.
Reed
Philipp
Interesting... is this (flagging source packages who "lose" a binary
package) an automatic process in the Debian back-end system, or
something that would only be initiated at the request of the package's
maintainer?
Reed
Florian Ernst wrote:
Hello *,
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 01:01:52AM +0200, P
Florian Ernst wrote:
Did you contact upstream about this already? Are there really any
plans to bring xsitecopy back?
Yes, I have. He says he's done some work on the Gnome 2.x version, but
didn't finish it. It's in his "If I ever get time..." queue at the moment.
FWIW, he agreed with the not
Hello *,
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 09:32:14AM -0500, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
> 4) After this release goes out, begin working with the upstream to try
> and get a new xsitecopy that could be added back to the sitecopy source
> package for some subsequent release.
Did you contact upstream about
Hello *,
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 01:01:52AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 23 Apr 2005, at 16:32, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
> >3) as an interim step, possibly ask ftp-masters to remove the existing
> >(semi-broken) xsitecopy-0.11.4-6 package (still undecided about that)
>
> I don't know really
On 23 Apr 2005, at 16:32, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
2) leave the existing Conflicts: in place as-is, because it suggested
an actual conflict with the earlier version of xsitecopy.
My question was more like this: Is the current xsitecopy in Debian
incompatible with the new one? If so please confli
Philipp Kern wrote:
Do you know why there is an outdated debian/ subdirectory in the
upstream tarball?
For this release, it's just the way the upstream developer put it
together :-) -- it's outdated because the last time it was touched by a
debian maintainer was for the 0.11.4 upstream release.
On 23 Apr 2005, at 05:45, Reed Snellenberger wrote:
Files are available at:
http://home.houston.rr.com/snellenberger/debian/sitecopy/
Do you know why there is an outdated debian/ subdirectory in the
upstream tarball?
And if the current version of sitecopy does not work with the old
xsitecop
Reed Snellenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef:
> I'd like to request a sponsor for sitecopy 1:0.15.0-1.
> Files are available at:
> http://home.houston.rr.com/snellenberger/debian/sitecopy/
> Package: sitecopy
I make use of sitecopy and have just upgraded to your new package. It works
wit
12 matches
Mail list logo
