On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 08:25:41AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Paul Elliott wrote:
> > ...
>
> Your mail doesn't include which package/data you are talking. It is
> very hard to give you correct advice when we aren't being given the
> necessary information about the
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mininet":
* Package name: mininet
Version : 2.2.0
Upstream Author : Bob Lantz et al.
* URL : http://mininet.org/
* License : BSD-like (mininet-lice
❦ 12 janvier 2015 14:30 +0100, Tomasz Buchert :
> It builds those binary packages:
>
> mininet - process-based network emulator
>
> To access further information about this package, please visit the
> following URL:
>
> http://mentors.debian.net/package/mininet
>
> Alternatively, on
On 12/01/15 15:03, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 12 janvier 2015 14:30 +0100, Tomasz Buchert :
>
> > It builds those binary packages:
> >
> > mininet - process-based network emulator
> >
> > To access further information about this package, please visit the
> > following URL:
> >
> > http:
❦ 12 janvier 2015 15:43 +0100, Tomasz Buchert :
>> - in d/copyright, you license debian/* under GPL-2+ but since the
>>original software is licensed as MIT, it would be "better"
>>to use the same license. This allows upstream to integrate your
>>changes more easily.
>
> That makes s
reassign 773245 src:git 1:2.1.3-1
quit
Vincent Cheng wrote:
> Yes, source packages in main can generate binary packages in contrib;
> Policy does not prevent this from happening, and there are existing
> source packages in main, in the archive, which generate binary
> packages in contrib. See e.g
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:14:23 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: qmapshack/0.10.0-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #775097,
regarding RFS: qmapshack/0.10.0-1~exp1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this i
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:14:21 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: pyepr/0.8.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #775043,
regarding RFS: pyepr/0.8.2-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Paul Elliott wrote:
> The new package contains data most people won't want. It is big. 69M
> But those who need this data, need it. By creating a different package,
> I give the majority the default of opting out, while giving the few
> the chance to get the data t
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:55:29PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Paul Elliott wrote:
>
> > The new package contains data most people won't want. It is big. 69M
> > But those who need this data, need it. By creating a different package,
> > I give the majority the defau
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Paul Elliott wrote:
> The two sets of data are disjoint.
Your initial mail made it sound like two packages have data in common.
Since they actually have no data in common, I'm not sure why forking
is needed.
If you are wondering about forking the debian/ dir, jus
Hi
I have tried to create a local debian package in my machine .After typing
fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage -F I have encountered these error .Please
give me a guidance to overcome this error...
make: *** [clean] Error 2
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules clean gave error exit status 2
Th
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Nandaraj Ks wrote:
> I have tried to create a local debian package in my machine .After typing
> fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage -F I have encountered these error .Please
> give me a guidance to overcome this error...
>
> make: *** [clean] Error 2
> dpkg-buildpacka
On 12/01/15 12:37, Brian White wrote:
> I don't maintain Signify it any longer (or even use it) so feel free to do
> with it whatever you like.
Hmm... does that mean that I need to adopt signify before
signify-openbsd will be accepted?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.de
14 matches
Mail list logo
