Re: sponsorship-requests

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 12:14:41PM +0200, ox16 wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, maintainer, developer > > I am looking for a sponsor for package "fonts-labiryntowy" * > Package name: fonts-labiryntowy > Version : 1.53-1 > Upstream

Odp: Re: sponsorship-requests

Dnia 29 maja 2018 14:04 Ko Ko Ye` napisał(a): * License : sil > you mean OFL-1.1 ? yes, SIL OFL-1.1

Re: sponsorship-requests

* License : sil > you mean OFL-1.1 ? On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM, ox16 wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, maintainer, developer > > I am looking for a sponsor for package "fonts-labiryntowy" > > * Package name: fonts-labiryntowy

Re: sponsorship for hdparm

Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2016, 14:42 +0100 schrieb Alex Mestiashvili: > Hi All, > > I am looking for a review for the orphaned hdparm package. > While there are still a couple of serious bugs open, some smaller > issues > and one grave bug #780940 can be fixed by the upload of the new > version. >

Re: sponsorship for hdparm

Hi, I think it is nice to open an RFS bug :) cheers, G. Il Martedì 8 Marzo 2016 14:42, Alex Mestiashvili ha scritto: Hi All, I am looking for a review for the orphaned hdparm package. While there are still a couple of serious bugs open, some smaller issues and one grave bug #780940 can be

Re: Sponsorship request for peg and opengrm-ngram

Dear mentors, I am re-asking for sponsorship for peg and opengrm-ngram. My usual sponsor is out of time and the new versions of both packages are waiting for upload since more than one month. Is there anybody willing to check/upload these two packages (or at least peg, that is very stra

Re: Sponsorship request

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ❦ 20 août 2013 11:13 CEST, Peter Pentchev : > >>> > I would like to request a review and sponsorship of my package. >>> > >>> > The package is available via the mentors website: >>> > >>> > https://mentors.debian.net/package/mosquitto >>>

Re: Sponsorship request

❦ 20 août 2013 11:13 CEST, Peter Pentchev  : >> > I would like to request a review and sponsorship of my package. >> > >> > The package is available via the mentors website: >> > >> > https://mentors.debian.net/package/mosquitto >> >> Please, file a RFS. It is easier to follow progress this way:

Re: Sponsorship request

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:51:38AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ❦ 20 août 2013 00:50 CEST, Roger Light  : > > > I would like to request a review and sponsorship of my package. > > > > The package is available via the mentors website: > > > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/mosquitto > > Ple

Re: Sponsorship request

❦ 20 août 2013 00:50 CEST, Roger Light  : > I would like to request a review and sponsorship of my package. > > The package is available via the mentors website: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/mosquitto Please, file a RFS. It is easier to follow progress this way: http://mentors.debian.

Re: Sponsorship

On 2013-04-20 23:56, Nathan Owens wrote: > Is there a way I can find out who my previous sponsor for my package > 'dwb' is? > > who-uploads dwb ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debia

Re: sponsorship-requests mails should not go to debian-mentors

Don Armstrong writes: > Anyone who doesn't want to receive mail from the BTS should be > trivially able to filter it out.[1] […] > 1: If you can't, either your MUA is severely limited, or you haven't > read its documentation, and you aren't interested in learning procmail > or sieve. Or we're n

Re: sponsorship-requests mails should not go to debian-mentors

On Tue, 06 Mar 2012, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > I hate to +1 without much content, but IMHO the "right" thing to do > would be to split off people trying to give or receive help and > automated mail regarding requests for sponsorship. Anyone who doesn't want to receive mail from the BTS should be t

Re: sponsorship-requests mails should not go to debian-mentors

We already tried to discuss the issue in Bug#658498: "sponsorship-requests and debian-mentors mailing list" but I have a feeling our argument hasn't been heard. Regards, Dmitry. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Co

Re: sponsorship-requests mails should not go to debian-mentors

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Samuel Bronson wrote: > It's getting to the point where I think it would be best if we do one > of two things: > >  1. Split out sponsorship-requests bug mail to a new mailing list. > >  2. Stop sending it anywhere, and let people subscribe through the PTS > if they

Re: sponsorship-requests mails should not go to debian-mentors

Samuel Bronson writes: > It's getting to the point where I think it would be best if we do one > of two things: > > 1. Split out sponsorship-requests bug mail to a new mailing list. > > 2. Stop sending it anywhere, and let people subscribe through the PTS > if they care. > > How about you? I'd

Re: sponsorship-requests

Le 17/02/2012 à 10:44, Savvas Radevic écrivit : > Looking at http://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/BTS I see we need to "tag" the > new packages with [NEW]. I've seen some bugs with [ITP], so which one > should we use, [NEW] or [ITP]? Hi! The correct tag is [ITP]. I've clarified on the wiki and the upc

Re: sponsorship-requests

Looking at http://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/BTS I see we need to "tag" the new packages with [NEW]. I've seen some bugs with [ITP], so which one should we use, [NEW] or [ITP]?

Re: sponsorship-requests and status

On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 03:28:03AM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello List: Hi, > > I understand that it can take some time to get a package sponsored. > > Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, > it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact > it is indeed orph

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:13:58 +0100 Jerome BENOIT wrote: > > > > You should use the existing wnpp bug report #525921 to state your > > intention to adopt instead of creating a new one. Please add a note > > to #525921 that you are intending to adopt the package, retitle it > > from O: to ITA: as d

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

Hi ! On 08/02/12 05:04, Dean Evans wrote: On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:40:40 +0100 Jerome BENOIT wrote: Hello List: On 08/02/12 03:42, Michael Gilbert wrote: Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact it is indeed orphaned

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:40:40 +0100 Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello List: > > On 08/02/12 03:42, Michael Gilbert wrote: > >> Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, > >> it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact > >> it is indeed orphaned, but also on the way to b

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

Hello List: On 08/02/12 03:42, Michael Gilbert wrote: Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact it is indeed orphaned, but also on the way to be adopted: a kind of limbo status. Do you mean something like: http://www.d

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:28:52 +0100 Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello List: > > I understand that it can take some time to get a package sponsored. > > Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, > it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact > it is indeed orphaned, but

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

> Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, > it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact > it is indeed orphaned, but also on the way to be adopted: > a kind of limbo status. Do you mean something like: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/orphaned_byage Anyone can ad

Re: sponsorship-requests and orphaned status

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > I understand that it can take some time to get a package sponsored. To say the least. > Nevertheless, when the involved package is orphaned, > it would be a good idea to change its status to reflect the fact > it is indeed orphaned, but als

Re: sponsorship-requests and debian-mentors mailing list

I think proposal regarding managing sponsorship through bug tracker was to encourage usage of bug tracker. To me forwarding BTS activity for sponsorship-requests to mentors mail list appears to be against the spirit and the desire of the proposal. Indeed we should encourage people to PTS-subscr

Re: sponsorship-requests and debian-mentors mailing list

>>  I.e. 13% of messages are useless for most subscribers. Is it good >>  reason to filter these messages? > > Try your luck: #658498 I haven't seen it. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists

Re: sponsorship-requests and debian-mentors mailing list

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07.02.2012 19:56, Boris Pek wrote: > I.e. 13% of messages are useless for most subscribers. Is it good > reason to filter these messages? Try your luck: #658498 - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID:

Re: sponsorship-requests

* Jakub Wilk , 2012-01-30, 22:44: We could ask listmasters to filter out BTS bot messages. Based on the feedback I received so far, I'm going to do that. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listma

Re: sponsorship-requests

Il giorno mar, 31/01/2012 alle 11.32 -0500, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio ha scritto: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Pietro Battiston > wrote: > > ¹ By the way, I guess creating a filter which catches all - and only - > > debian-mentors emails is not trivial at all with email clients which do > > n

Re: sponsorship-requests

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 30.01.2012 22:44, Jakub Wilk wrote: > What do others think? It turns out the signal/noise ratio is higher than I expected. Many control messages are not really helpful out of any context. Maybe it is better to sort them out, leaving an easy o

Re: sponsorship-requests

Le Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:44:02PM +0100, Jakub Wilk a écrit : > > We could ask listmasters to filter out BTS bot messages. Now, there > are certainly people (e.g. me) who do want to see control messages. > But they could always subscribe to sponsorship-requests via PTS. > > What do others think?

Re: sponsorship-requests

Il giorno lun, 30/01/2012 alle 23.48 +0100, gregor herrmann ha scritto: > On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:44:02 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > > > We could ask listmasters to filter out BTS bot messages. Now, there > > are certainly people (e.g. me) who do want to see control messages. > > But they could alway

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:44:02 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > We could ask listmasters to filter out BTS bot messages. Now, there > are certainly people (e.g. me) who do want to see control messages. > But they could always subscribe to sponsorship-requests via PTS. > What do others think? I'm happ to

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:35:53 +0100, Savvas Radevic wrote: > 1. If I have an already open bug in wnpp, do I close it or merge it with > the one in s-r (=sponsorship-requests)? No, they are independent. The WNPP bug is about the package itself, and the SR bug is about sponsoring. > 2. If I have a

Re: sponsorship-requests

* Boris Pek , 2012-01-30, 23:01: But this list was quite interesting (at least for me). Sponsored maintainers can learn more not only by own mistakes but also when they are reading other emails here. System messages from the bot are not very useful. Just a noise... I am sorry that this cause

Re: sponsorship-requests

1. If I have an already open bug in wnpp, do I close it or merge it with the one in s-r (=sponsorship-requests)? 2. If I have a package uploaded, which bug should I mention in debian/changelog? wnpp and/or s-r? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=654892 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/

Re: sponsorship-requests

>>>  Is it active and the preferred way now? So as of now, we should file >>>  a bug with sponsorship-requests instead of sending an email directly >>>  to debian-mentors list? >>  It generates too much noise in this mailing list I think. It will be very >>  uncomfortable to people who did not setu

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Boris Pek wrote: >> Is it active and the preferred way now? So as of now, we should file >> a bug with sponsorship-requests instead of sending an email directly >> to debian-mentors list? > > It generates too much noise in this mailing list I think. It will be very

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:51:47 -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > > In practice, how does a request for sponsorship appear at > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;dist=unstable > > ? > I'm CC'ing the list again, because I think this is worthwhile to > everyone (and

Re: sponsorship-requests

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 30.01.2012 21:10, Slavko wrote: > please, will be change in mandatory way announced here? I will announce the the mentors.debian.net change, but I can't do much to get people adapting the the new workflow. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC:

Re: sponsorship-requests

> Is it active and the preferred way now? So as of now, we should file > a bug with sponsorship-requests instead of sending an email directly > to debian-mentors list? It generates too much noise in this mailing list I think. It will be very uncomfortable to people who did not setup mailing filter

Re: sponsorship-requests

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hallo, Dňa Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:55:52 +0100 Arno Töll napísal: > Yes. For now, mentors.debian.net isn't updated yet, so consider ourself > being in a transitional period where both approaches are fine. That is > something coming up in a few days thou

Re: sponsorship-requests

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 30.01.2012 20:51, Savvas Radevic wrote: > Is it active and the preferred way now? So as of now, we should file a bug > with sponsorship-requests instead of sending an email directly to > debian-mentors list? Yes. For now, mentors.debian.net is

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > >>> >>> Is there already any howto ro document about it ? >> >> >> About what? Pseudo-packages or mentors.debian.net? >> > > I know what both are, but it is not clear to me how this pseudo-package is > involved ? > > In practice, how does a r

Re: sponsorship-requests

Is it active and the preferred way now? So as of now, we should file a bug with sponsorship-requests instead of sending an email directly to debian-mentors list?

Re: sponsorship-requests

>>  where can we grab the source of the sponsorship-requests Debian package ? > > sponsorship-requests is a pseudo-package -- it's like a package, but > it's not actually. This is so the BTS can be used for bugs, without > actually having a package in Debian. > > It's for use with http://mentors.de

Re: sponsorship-requests

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello List: > > where can we grab the source of the sponsorship-requests Debian package ? sponsorship-requests is a pseudo-package -- it's like a package, but it's not actually. This is so the BTS can be used for bugs, without actually havin

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

Hi, On Freitag, 20. März 2009, Holger Levsen wrote: > Yeah, that (file) looks totally reasonable to me. What has changed in the > proposal that this is outdated now? Why not change it back? Ok, I saw your mail on -devel now, stating that you were using revision 50 and its at 500 now... regards

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

[Transferred to -devel as suggested. Please follow-up there]. Le Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 04:40:33PM +, Sune Vuorela a écrit : > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat > > It is a too complex, overengineered solution to a very minor issue. > It is not easy readables for humans > It is u

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

Hi, On Donnerstag, 19. März 2009, Neil Williams wrote: > there were some good points of the earlier drafts of that page and I use > these in my own packages but the current version is completely > unusable and unacceptable. (For an example of an acceptable midpoint, > see > http://packages.debian.

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

Sune Vuorela writes: > After a discussion on #debian-mentors and other places, I will not > sponsor packages using the copyright file format described on > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat For those who weren't present when you were having that IRC discussion, can you point us to

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:40:33 + (UTC) Sune Vuorela wrote: > After a discussion on #debian-mentors and other places, I will not > sponsor packages using the copyright file format described on > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat As I said during one of those discussions on IRC,

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 04:40:33PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > After a discussion on #debian-mentors and other places, I will not > sponsor packages using the copyright file format described on > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat I like the format, and I will only sponsor NEW pack

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On 7/25/07, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In galeon I am unable to scroll down and see the sponsoring > guidelines, which are clearly there when looking at the source code. Nothing wrong with galeon at this end - it is my default browser! H, perhaps some of my settings broke

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:27:02 +0100 Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:08:10 +1000 > "Paul Wise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 7/25/07, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > > > > > > > Content seem

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:08:10 +1000 "Paul Wise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/25/07, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > > > > > Content seems to be missing? > > > > ? I see alot of content. > > In galeon I am unable to scroll down a

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On 7/25/07, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > Content seems to be missing? ? I see alot of content. In galeon I am unable to scroll down and see the sponsoring guidelines, which are clearly there when looking at the source code. Probably

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 03:32:15PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > Done. > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > (If this could be added to mentors.debian.net in due course maybe? Ta.) I agree. This doubles as a nice checklist before shooting off that RFS mail! :-) Great! Kumar -- K

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

Hi Neil! * Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-07-24 17:12]: > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:43:41 +0200 > Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > > > > > (If this could be added to mentors.debian.net in due course maybe? Ta.) > > > > Here's my

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 03:32:15PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:50:08 +0530 > Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In fact, I precisely looked for that page in your Debian home page. Do > > get to making it when you get the time. > > Done. > > http://people.debi

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:43:41 +0200 Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > > > (If this could be added to mentors.debian.net in due course maybe? Ta.) > > Here's my rough checklist: > http://people.debian.org/~nion/sponsoring-checklist.html Nice

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:44:30 +0300 Damyan Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -=| Neil Williams, 24.07.2007 17:32 |=- > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > Content seems to be missing? ? refresh the page ? I definitely uploaded and checked the file before sending the email to this

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

Hi, * Damyan Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-07-24 16:47]: > -=| Neil Williams, 24.07.2007 17:32 |=- > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor > > Content seems to be missing? ? I see alot of content. Cheers Nico -- Nico Golde - http://ngolde.de - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - GPG: 0x73647CFF For s

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

-=| Neil Williams, 24.07.2007 17:32 |=- > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor Content seems to be missing? -- damJabberID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Sponsorship guidelines for codehelp - now online.

Hi, * Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-07-24 16:34]: > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:50:08 +0530 > Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In fact, I precisely looked for that page in your Debian home page. Do > > get to making it when you get the time. > > Done. > > http://people.debian.

Re: Sponsorship offering

Hi, > > By submitting a patch for the upgrade for instance or bugging with a > pointer to the updated package. We will manage to poke the maintainer > or so. > probably you want to contact the maintainers then and ask them if they'd like to have their package maintained by a team. Especially pa

Re: Sponsorship offering

On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 11:59:43PM +0200, Francesco Namuri wrote: > Hi Francesco, > > Il giorno sab, 23/06/2007 alle 18.23 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine ha > scritto: > > If people in the NM queue would consider the list of packages here: > > > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianGis/ToDo > > > > whi

Re: Sponsorship offering

Hi Francesco, Il giorno sab, 23/06/2007 alle 18.23 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine ha scritto: > If people in the NM queue would consider the list of packages here: > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianGis/ToDo > > which need update to a new upstream release, they would be considerate > soon for spons

Re: Sponsorship offering

On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 07:39:24PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote: > > gpsbabel needs updating to 1.3.3 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache show gpsbabel|grep Version > Version: 1.3.3-2 > > Haven't checked the other but this one seems to be done already. > Ah sorry, mismatched. The other ones should be

Re: Sponsorship offering

On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 06:23:58PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > If people in the NM queue would consider the list of packages here: > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianGis/ToDo > > which need update to a new upstream release, they would be considerate > soon for sponsoring and have an imme

Re: Sponsorship for gift

Hi, From: Manuel Garcia Subject: Sponsorship for gift Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:19:26 -0400 > Hi, i ITA gift, gift-openft and gift-gnutella, i have already prepare > a package for gift-gnutella with a new release version, but i don't have > any sponsor for it, if anyone is interested i will appre

Re: Sponsorship for 2 important uploads and 1 less important

On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:08:57PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote: > Did you find sponsor already? If not please contact me privately and I'll > upload your packages. Thanks. Artur -- X potrzebuje kobiety - płeć i gatunek nie grają roli. /z i

Re: Sponsorship for 2 important uploads and 1 less important

On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 06:41:25PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote: > A person which I usually bother to upload my packages is on holidays now > and I have two packages to upload ASAP. > php4-rrdtool and rrdcollect depend on librrd, which has changed SONAME last > days and my packages are uninstal

Re: sponsorship request

Hi Ian. Ian Zimmerman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Copyright: > The upstream makepp package is dual licensed under either > the Perl style Artistic License or the GNU General Public license (GPL). > Accordingly, this Debian package is distributed under GPL, Version 2. > On Debian systems, the full

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Am Die, den 10.02.2004 schrieb Matthew Palmer um 12:07: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:21:49AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > > I make no guarantees about how quickly your upload will be made. This > > > has been a big problem in the past, and I hope it will never be so bad > > > in the future. H

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 12:35:19PM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Two quick things on the checklist: > - Maybe do add a quirk that the prospective packager should (or even say must) > have read the canonical docs (policy, d.'s r., newmaint) and that th

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Am Die, den 10.02.2004 schrieb Matthew Palmer um 12:07: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:21:49AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > > I make no guarantees about how quickly your upload will be made. This > > > has been a big problem in the past, and I hope it will never be so bad > > > in the future. H

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Hi. Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Two quick things on the checklist: - Maybe do add a quirk that the prospective packager should (or even say must) have read the canonical docs (policy, d.'s r., newmaint) and that the checklist not a subsitute. Every now and then I do get the impr

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 12:35:19PM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Two quick things on the checklist: > - Maybe do add a quirk that the prospective packager should (or even say must) > have read the canonical docs (policy, d.'s r., newmaint) and that th

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Hi. Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Two quick things on the checklist: - Maybe do add a quirk that the prospective packager should (or even say must) have read the canonical docs (policy, d.'s r., newmaint) and that the checklist not a subsitute. Every now and then I do get the impre

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:21:49AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > You must be intending to join the Debian project at some point in the > > future. I see sponsorship as a step to becoming a DD, not an end in > > and of itself. You may not have a specific timeline for applying, but > > if you t

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:21:49AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > You must be intending to join the Debian project at some point in the > > future. I see sponsorship as a step to becoming a DD, not an end in > > and of itself. You may not have a specific timeline for applying, but > > if you t

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Am Die, den 10.02.2004 schrieb Matthew Palmer um 10:01: > Discussion can be either on-list or privately, whatever you fancy. I'd also > appreciate comments from potential sponsees as to whether the notes are > comprehensible, and whether I've gone power-mad. I would prefer on-list discussion (off

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

Am Die, den 10.02.2004 schrieb Matthew Palmer um 10:01: > Discussion can be either on-list or privately, whatever you fancy. I'd also > appreciate comments from potential sponsees as to whether the notes are > comprehensible, and whether I've gone power-mad. I would prefer on-list discussion (off

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

* Fiona Guenther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031010 23:23]: > On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 18:17, Martin Wuertele wrote: > > Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to > > contribute, hell there are guys heavily contributing for years without > > the intention jo go through NM. >

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 18:17, Martin Wuertele wrote: > Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to > contribute, hell there are guys heavily contributing for years without > the intention jo go through NM. So I just rename the corresponding RFA-Bug to ITA and start to

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

* Fiona Guenther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031010 23:23]: > On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 18:17, Martin Wuertele wrote: > > Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to > > contribute, hell there are guys heavily contributing for years without > > the intention jo go through NM. >

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 18:17, Martin Wuertele wrote: > Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to > contribute, hell there are guys heavily contributing for years without > the intention jo go through NM. So I just rename the corresponding RFA-Bug to ITA and start to

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

* Fiona Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-10 16:40]: > Should I look for a sponsor who uploads my package for me? I this > possible even though I don't (yet) apply for the NM process? Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to contribute, hell there are guys heav

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:54:27PM +0200, Fiona Guenther wrote: > I want to apply for Debian Maintainer some time in the future, but I > don't feel ready right now. Nevertheless, I think I'm able to maintain > one or two packages which are up for adoption. This way, I can learn > how this packaging

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

* Fiona Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-10 16:40]: > Should I look for a sponsor who uploads my package for me? I this > possible even though I don't (yet) apply for the NM process? Just look for a sponsor, no need be a Debian Developer or to be in NM to contribute, hell there are guys heav

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:54:27PM +0200, Fiona Guenther wrote: > I want to apply for Debian Maintainer some time in the future, but I > don't feel ready right now. Nevertheless, I think I'm able to maintain > one or two packages which are up for adoption. This way, I can learn > how this packaging

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

Hi Fiona, On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:54:27PM +0200, Fiona Guenther wrote: > I want to apply for Debian Maintainer some time in the future, but I don't > feel ready right now. Nevertheless, I think I'm able to maintain one or two > packages which are up for adoption. This way, I can learn how this

Re: Sponsorship for non-NM?

Hi Fiona, On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:54:27PM +0200, Fiona Guenther wrote: > I want to apply for Debian Maintainer some time in the future, but I don't > feel ready right now. Nevertheless, I think I'm able to maintain one or two > packages which are up for adoption. This way, I can learn how this

Re: sponsorship for streamripper

Hi, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > someone? > Me. -- Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de - - "I count religion but a childish toy, And hold there is no sin but ignorance." [Chris

Re: sponsorship for streamripper

Hi, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > someone? > Me. -- Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de - - "I count religion but a childish toy, And hold there is no sin but ignorance." [Chris

Re: sponsorship for streamripper

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 hi, On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:14:22PM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > I seek for an Developer who would sponsor the upload of the Package > "streamripper". Streamripper is an command-line Tool to rip of Online > Streams into track-seperated mp3 f

Re: sponsorship for streamripper

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 hi, On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:14:22PM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > I seek for an Developer who would sponsor the upload of the Package > "streamripper". Streamripper is an command-line Tool to rip of Online > Streams into track-seperated mp3 f

  1   2   >