Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I have taken over the debian packaging for ASDF from François-René
Rideau and am looking for sponsors for the current 3.1.6 release:
Package name: cl-asdf
Version : 2:3.1.6-1
Upstream Author : Robert P. Goldman
URL
Hi,
>> is it possible to have uscan check multiple hosts? e.g. for GNU
>> findutils I would like to look at both stable and unstable releases
>
>Are you aware the watch file is meant to find a *single* tarball?
>
>What would you want the result of scanning multiple hosts; how would
>you want dif
Hi Mattia,
On 2015-12-28 18:56 CET, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 06:29:03PM +0100, Kambiz Darabi wrote:
>> sorry for bothering you again but there are people who are interested in
>> a new debian package of ASDF 3.1.6
>
> You didn't file a RFS.
> Me and other "random sponors y
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 09:13:59 +0100 Jerome Benoit
wrote:
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
>
> Dear Mentors:
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the package gap-guava that
> I am maintining on behalf of the Debian Science Team.
> This pacakge fix a reproduciblefi
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages]
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "otb"
* Package name: otb
Version : 5.2.0+dfsg-1
Upstream Author : cont...@orfe-toolbox.org
* URL : htt
Ben Finney wrote:
> Andreas Metzler writes:
>> is it possible to have uscan check multiple hosts? e.g. for GNU
>> findutils I would like to look at both stable and unstable releases
> Are you aware the watch file is meant to find a *single* tarball?
Yes, I am aware of that.
> What would you w
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> is it possible to have uscan check multiple hosts? e.g.
> for GNU findutils I would like to look at both stable and unstable
> releases i.e. combining these two watchfiles:
uscan already supports this, add two sites in one watch file:
vers
Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> is it possible to have uscan check multiple hosts? e.g.
>> for GNU findutils I would like to look at both stable and unstable
>> releases i.e. combining these two watchfiles:
> uscan already supports this, add two site
Hello,
I'd like to maintain the wicd package, especially because it's a kind of
popular package. That would offer me a great challenge to master. But i
assume, I'll certainly make errors and certainly be very slow at the
beginning in comparison with an experienced maintainer.
I can't estimat
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
OTB is well modularaized since 5.0.0. This allows external apps or
libaries to use have some of the otb libs not all
For instance,
monteverdi required only a small subset of libs:
OTBApplica
On 12/29/2015 11:46 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
Hi Rashad,
Thanks for your work on otb. I've sponsored the upload.
lintian did report a new spelling error, please fix this as part of the
next upload:
I: libotb-apps: spelling-error-in-binary
usr/lib/otb/applications/otbapp_GridBasedIma
control: owner -1 !
control: tag -1 moreinfo
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 09:37:52AM +0100, Kambiz Darabi wrote:
> I have taken over the debian packaging for ASDF from François-René
> Rideau and am looking for sponsors for the current 3.1.6 release:
[...]
> dget -x
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian
Your message dated Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:46:25 +0100
with message-id <56826481.40...@xs4all.nl>
and subject line RFS: otb/5.2.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- Orfeo Toolbox [uploaded]
has caused the Debian Bug report #809312,
regarding RFS: otb/5.2.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- Orfeo Toolbox
to be marked as done.
This means t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi:
On 29/12/15 10:16, Tobias Frost wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 09:13:59 +0100 Jerome Benoit
> wrote:
>> Package: sponsorship-requests
>> Severity: normal
>>
>> Dear Mentors:
>>
>> I am looking for a sponsor for the package gap-guava that
|X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org|
Hi Rashad,
Thanks for working on packaging the ORFEO toolbox to Debian.
I am wondering about the usefulness of having so many binary packages. I
guess this reflects the fact that OTB is nicely modularized, but even
toolkits like VTK / ITK are packaged with a reduced number of binary
packages
Gianfranco,
think I have had success with the watch file. I found that if you store
the signature within a branch (in this case the debian branch) then you can
directly access the .asc file via the watch file.
Also I've removed the unneeded "license removal" patch. This just leaves
the patch
On 29-12-15 11:54, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> should I fix the spelling and reupload now or wait for the NEW queue.
I'd fix it in git now, and wait for the next upload until it passes the
NEW queue.
Kind Regards,
Bas
--
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 5
Hi, Gianfranco
> Hi, the package was already in new queue, and got accepted yesterday.
>
> Please move your fixes in a -2 revision and ping me when done.
>
>
> and please start from the -1 version in experimental
>
Eriberto got time and is helping.
Thanks to paying attention with the package
> Package name: re2c
Alas, the new version failed to build on five architectures. Even worse,
the build logs contain no meaningful output:
.--
make check-TESTS
make[2]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»'
make[3]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»'
FAIL: run_tests.sh
PASS: testrange
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pentobi", just a couple days after
getting the previous version packaged and sponsored.
This new major release was released today.
Package name: pentobi
Version : 11.0-1
Upstream A
On 29/12/15 10:09, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
The following citation from the very link you provided is far from the
definition I know of "must":
"If you have several shared libraries built from
Hi Iain,
thanks for the detailed review!
On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 21:37:31 + "Iain R. Learmonth" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Unfortunately this is not yet ready for upload. It's nearly there though.
Good to hear :).
> debian/copyright: This is one of the most important things to get right,
> and you have
Quoting Ghislain Vaillant :
On 29/12/15 10:09, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
The following citation from the very link you provided is far from
the definition I know of "must":
I didn't mean RTFM
Your message dated Tue, 29 Dec 2015 22:47:52 +0100
with message-id <20151229214752.ga2...@shiftout.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#808538: RFS: corebird
has caused the Debian Bug report #808538,
regarding RFS: corebird/1.1-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Hi all, sorry for the long delay.
Some new points for Alec (added him in the loop, and also the RFS bug
@Alec, please look at the review below, it is really complete, and report back
when you have addressed the points.
@Alexander, can you please make Stefan admin of pkg-lirc?
this way Stefan wi
On Monday, December 28 2015, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> also the - is a good separator.
Heh, sometimes the solution is so obvious... For some reason (so
obscure that I cannot remember), I thought that '-' could not be used in
this specific case. That's why I was trying with '+' or '
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Debugging the failure requires access to a machine, real or emulated, of one
> of architectures that fail. I suspect that you have no mips, powerpc,
> s390x, hppa or sparc64 machines lying around -- and access to Debian's
> porterboxes is r
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Philip Rinn wrote:
> I removed the "--parallel" now.
If the upstream build system supports parallel builds, you are just
wasting buildd time by removing that option, please put it back in.
The only reason that it isn't the default yet is because not all
upstream
Sergio Durigan Junior writes:
> On Monday, December 28 2015, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>
> > also the - is a good separator.
>
> Heh, sometimes the solution is so obvious... For some reason (so
> obscure that I cannot remember), I thought that '-' could not be used in
> this specific case.
I
30 matches
Mail list logo
