Hello Jason,
here's my comments
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 08:15, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Hello Jason,
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 02:56, Jason Holt wrote:
>> Dear mentors,
>>
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "googlecl".
debian/changelog
- given it's a NEW package, there's no need for a -
söndag den 13 juni 2010 klockan 01:46 skrev Tim Retout detta:
> On 4 June 2010 10:45, Mats Erik Andersson
> wrote:
> > I am seeking an __active__ sponsor for this package.
>
> I'm afraid it seems you're stuck with me. ;) At DebConf we (the
This pleases me!
> project) shall have to discuss the
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 03:21:20AM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.11-1
> of the package "tina".
And here goes my second attempt to adopt tina - nothing changed
since the first one, just resending the RFS :)
> This is an adoptio
* Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
or LDAP or something else.
Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
unhappy with the way it is currently implemented.
--
Jakub Wilk
signature.asc
Descript
On 06/15/2010 12:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> debian/googlecl.manpages
> - why manpage is called so generically 'google.1' and not googlecl.1'
> given it's for the executable 'googlecl'
In fact the package installs /usr/bin/google not /usr/bin/googlecl.
As a not-so-experienced person, I shouldn't h
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:00, Umang Varma wrote:
> On 06/15/2010 12:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> debian/googlecl.manpages
>> - why manpage is called so generically 'google.1' and not googlecl.1'
>> given it's for the executable 'googlecl'
> In fact the package installs /usr/bin/google not /usr/bi
Le Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:57:57AM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
> * Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
>> I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail bot
>> or LDAP or something else.
>
> Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am very
> unhappy with th
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Paul Wise , 2010-06-15, 10:14:
> > I'd personally like to see DMUA move from source packages to a mail
> > bot or LDAP or something else.
>
> Same here. While I endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers, I am
> very unhappy with the way it is currently implemented.
As a De
Hello,
2010/6/15 Peter Pentchev :
>> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.11-1
>> of the package "tina".
>
> And here goes my second attempt to adopt tina - nothing changed
> since the first one, just resending the RFS :)
Thanks for the reminder! :-)
>> Of course, I realize it woul
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.0.0~svn4035-1
of my package "n2n".
It build these binary package:
n2n- Peer-to-Peer VPN network daemon
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
> that only a sponsor can change.
Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
feel free to give us dak patches making DM saner. you will be heard.
(from the #deb
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
> wrote:
>
> > I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
> > while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at the very
> > same time.
>
> Th
[I am a DM]
Hi there,
Even this is against the spirit of Debian Maintainer Concept, I
believe this is because people are pragmatic.
Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
- HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling sy
Hello Alexander,
2010/6/14 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl :
> So I think asking for DMUA:Yes while seeking an initial sponsor is just
> plain wrong, as convincing a DD shouldn't be a one timer. I therefore
> ask DMs not to ask to set this flag on the first upload, and DDs not to
> do so.
Apologies I
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:14:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
> their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
> further and do not mention that in debian/changelog nor in their RFS
> mail.
That is general
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
[..]
[ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
[..]
Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule
Hi!
Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre:
> Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same
> packages (GDCM) because in between each upload:
Why 5 times?
> - HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling symnlink,
> - arm/armel updated the java package and libraries m
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.5.3~20100601-2
of my package "projectcenter.app".
It builds these binary packages:
projectcenter.app - IDE for GNUstep Development
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 585978
The package can be
On 2010-06-15, Paul Wise wrote:
> This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in
> their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. Others go
I guess it is unimportant who exactly writes the lines to
debian/control. But the sponsor should definately agree on it being
[Mathieu Malaterre, 2010-06-15]
> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
well, it is hard indeed (if you want a new DD for every upload).
Hint: try to ask previous sponsor first!
> I completely unde
[Simon Richter, 2010-06-15]
> I don't think it needs to be reflected in the changelog either, as it
> doesn't really concern the packaging as such, but only upload
> permissions (also, if I should set it, then I'd have to write the
> changelog entry, no?).
what about other DDs? I want to have a co
Hello All,
My previous RFS for this package was premature because I had not prepared the
Debian source files. Even though the package contains no compiled code, this
was a gross omission, for which I apologize. I have carefully built the Debian
source files according to the documentation.
H
On Di, 15 Jun 2010, Lloyd Standish wrote:
> Debian source: http://files.lstandish.com/snap2-source
>
> The package appears to be lintian-clean.
How do you come to that idea?
I unpacked your package, built it with dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -rfakeroot,
and run lintian on the resulting package:
$ ls
Dear Norbert,
Thank you for your help with my snap2 project.
The package appears to be lintian-clean.
How do you come to that idea?
Of course I came to that idea by running lintian (Lintian v1.24.2.1+lenny1)
against the binary deb. It reported nothing (clean). I think the problem is
tha
David Paleino writes:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors
>> > while asking for setting the "DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" flag at
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes:
> [..]
> [ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes]
>
>> Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would
>> have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD.
> [..]
>
> Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule than th
On 2010-06-15, Lloyd Standish wrote:
> It did not occur to me to check for gtkdialog in Sid (it is available
> in Lenny http://packages.debian.org/lenny/gtkdialog). So, until
> there is a gtkdialog package in Sid, snap2 cannot run. This is a
> great disappointment - I put a lot of effort into
On Tuesday 15 June 2010 05:42:43 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Ben Finney
wrote:
> > The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
> > that only a sponsor can change.
>
> Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
>
> feel free to give us
Paul Wise writes:
> Ben Finney wrote:
>> The field should go away and be replaced with an out-of-band setting
>> that only a sponsor can change.
> Looks like there is the possibility of changing this:
> feel free to give us dak patches making DM saner. you will be heard.
> (from the #debian-
Dear mentors,
I have already posted this earlier but since I haven't yet found a
sponsor for my package, I'll give it another try since I think that
this software will proof very useful for a lot of users.
qhimdtransfer is part of the software developed by a couple of people
around me within the
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:55:00 -0500
Chris wrote:
> Hi folks -
>
> Per the inspection from Paul, I mailed the folks at Partners In Rhyme
> about the use of the audio files from the email titled:
>
> Re: RFS: marave - 2nd Attempt
>
> There was some questioning about the copyrights that they have
On Di, 15 Jun 2010, Lloyd Standish wrote:
> Of course I came to that idea by running lintian (Lintian v1.24.2.1+lenny1)
> against the binary deb. It reported nothing (clean). I think the problem is
> that I am running the Debian stable (Lenny) version of dpkg-dev, and you are
> probably runnin
Norbert,
Thanks very much for pointing out how lintian is used to check a source
package. I would have seen this if I had read the lintian man page carefully.
I looked at zenity. From the man page which describes the command line
options, I don't think it is capable of a complex dialog with
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> qhimdtransfer is part of the software developed by a couple of people
> around me within the linux-minidisc project [1].
You might want to join the multimedia team:
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debi
34 matches
Mail list logo
