"Paul Wise" – August 21, 2019 8:50 PM
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:45 AM Antonio Russo wrote:
>
> > How exactly can I find a sponsor to help me maintain an orphaned Debian
> package?
>
> Upload the new package to mentors and file a request for sponsor:
>
> mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainer
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:45 AM Antonio Russo wrote:
> How exactly can I find a sponsor to help me maintain an orphaned Debian
> package?
Upload the new package to mentors and file a request for sponsor:
https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers
https://mentors.debian.net/sponsors/rfs-howto
FTP Masters
(Bug#935223: Removed package(s) from unstable)
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 01:45:41 +
From: Debian Bug Tracking System
Reply-To: 927...@bugs.debian.org
To: Antonio Russo
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
which was filed against the src:kcollectd package
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
wrote:
> I won't poke them to review my package, as if it was the most important
> thing in the universe, before anything else. I just wanted to ask about its
> status and possible review because my package is already towards the fro
towards the front
> of the queue since a few weeks ago, and new packages behind mine are being
> approved constantly, and mine isn't.
From what I understand, the release team has asked the FTP Masters to
avoid accepting new binary packages which introduce a transition, as
Ogre doe
age at this moment.
Freeze is a trying time for lots of bits of Debian and definitely for
the ftp masters. The problem is your question about when they can look
at your package revolves around when with the next version of Debian be
released, and we all know the answer to that is "when it&#x
On Thursday 16 December 2010 18:28:33 Luke Faraone wrote:
> On 12/16/2010 11:08 AM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> > On Wednesday 27 October 2010 16:24:38 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> >>> 2.1- If so, what's would be the time appropriate to ask? 1 month for
> >>
> >> 1 Month sounds re
On 12/16/2010 11:08 AM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2010 16:24:38 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
>>> 2.1- If so, what's would be the time appropriate to ask? 1 month for
>>
>> 1 Month sounds reasonable to me under normal circumstances.
>
> Two months have gone
Hi,
On Wednesday 27 October 2010 16:24:38 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> > 2.1- If so, what's would be the time appropriate to ask? 1 month for
>
> 1 Month sounds reasonable to me under normal circumstances.
Two months have gone by, and no feedback.
Is there any kind of alternative for thes
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
wrote:
> I've been hanging around in this list for a while, I think that I only
> reviewed a package once (and replied to one question from your about the
> correct way to test man pages :) ). But most of the time it's because the
>
Hi again,
Thanks all for your informative and quick replies. You've covered all bases
so I don't have any questions left, just one comment:
On Wednesday 27 October 2010 16:04:19 Charles Plessy wrote:
> Although a modest help, you may try to review some packages by yourself
> when a public copy
Hi
Dne Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:50:16 +0200
"Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" napsal(a):
> The matter is that I got a new version of an existing package compiled and
> uploaded by a sponsor (I'm just DM so I can't directly upload my stuff), and
> the package is stuck
Hi!
/me takes his ftp-assistant hat on.
Am 27.10.2010 15:50, schrieb Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo:
> So I am wondering whether my package has a specific problem (though I
> was not contacted by ftp masters in any way), [..]
If you have a working e-mail address, we'll contact you,
Dear Manuel,
accumulation of packages in the NEW queue is not uncommon, see:
http://people.debian.org/~corsac/
Although a modest help, you may try to review some packages by yourself when a
public copy is available, for instance on mendors.d.n or a VCS. The maintainers
will probalby have enough
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
wrote:
> 1- If this is normal, or if having to wait for >1 week indicates that the
> package has some kind of problem.
It is normal, especially during the freeze. The oldest package in new
has been waiting 11 months.
> 2- In the lat
a new version of an existing package compiled and
uploaded by a sponsor (I'm just DM so I can't directly upload my stuff), and
the package is stuck in the "new" queue of the ftp masters machine for two
weeks. I realize that there are a lot of packages to be processed, some in
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> But does really an end user knows/cares about it? You are talkink
> from a developer POV, that's a little bit low-level than most of our
> users.
Someone who is looking at the changelog is getting to the lower levels
anyway. [Plus, it's not like this is pa
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 01:07, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> Because it doesn't add any information for the end users,
>
> Sure it does. It tells end users what was changed in between the
> REJECT and the new upload. Eliding this means that it
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Because it doesn't add any information for the end users,
Sure it does. It tells end users what was changed in between the
REJECT and the new upload. Eliding this means that it's no longer
possible to trivially tell what was changed between uploads.[1]
>
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 00:33, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 15:11, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > [T]here's no good reason I can see to re-use a release number
>> > after it's uploaded.
>>
>> Because it ne
"Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 15:11, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [T]here's no good reason I can see to re-use a release number
> > after it's uploaded.
>
> Because it never reach the archive, so it's better to keep the same
> version for a REJEC
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (30/07/2008):
> > There's no reason not to increment the version. You've made a
> > release, and have made changes to that release. Whether it
> > actually hits the archive is immaterial. You just build with the
> > app
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (30/07/2008):
> > Because it never reach the archive, so it's better to keep the same
> > version for a REJECTED package: jumping revision is useless.
>
> There's no reason not to increment the version. You've made a release,
> and have made changes to that releas
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 15:11, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tobias Quathamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> You can send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask them to REJECT your
> >> package now, without doing further checks and then upl
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 15:11, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tobias Quathamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You can send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask them to REJECT your
>> package now, without doing further checks and then upload again. You
>> can even re-use the same version
Tobias Quathamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You can send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask them to REJECT your
> package now, without doing further checks and then upload again. You
> can even re-use the same version number then.
Though there's no good reason I can see to re-use a release
On Wednesday 30 July 2008 13:50:10 Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> If a package has been uploaded to NEW, but has not been yet approved or
> rejected by ftp-masters, and if this package has a mistake that is
> better to be corrected before the package gets into unstable, then what
> is
Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> If a package has been uploaded to NEW, but has not been yet approved or
> rejected by ftp-masters, and if this package has a mistake that is
> better to be corrected before the package gets into unstable, then what
> is the official procedure of doing suc
If a package has been uploaded to NEW, but has not been yet approved or
rejected by ftp-masters, and if this package has a mistake that is
better to be corrected before the package gets into unstable, then what
is the official procedure of doing such correction?
--
Stanislav
--
To
29 matches
Mail list logo
