Hi Mattia,
On 2022-02-27 19:21, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:53:26AM +0200, Andrius Merkys wrote:
>> The naming scheme could be adjusted to add '.' before the letter in
>> version string (2.40c -> 2.40.c), but I cannot craft a watch file which
>> could perform this.
>
> I'm
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 12:39:38PM +0530, Charles wrote:
>
> When that doubt is resolved I will create 3.2.1-2 including a watch file
do
Your message dated Wed, 2 Mar 2022 11:39:55 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: RFS: rednotebook/2.24+ds-1~bpo11+1 -- Modern desktop diary
and personal journaling tool
has caused the Debian Bug report #1006639,
regarding RFS: rednotebook/2.24+ds-1~bpo11+1 -- Modern desktop diary and
perso
Your message dated Wed, 2 Mar 2022 11:47:32 +0100
with message-id <9fb33088-732b-2833-f9e4-c32975ace...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: RFS: asciidoc/10.1.4-1 -- Highly configurable text format
for writing documentation
has caused the Debian Bug report #1006654,
regarding RFS: asciidoc/10.1.4-1 -
Hello Mentors,
At https://packages.debian.org/source/bullseye/gnutls28
are the packages 'gnutls30' and 'gnutls28-dev'.
And missing to me are the packages 'gnutls28' and 'gnutls30-dev'
But are they truely missing? In other words:
Why is there no 'gnutls28'? (There is a 'gnutls28-dev' )
Why is
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rednotebook":
* Package name: rednotebook
Version : 2.24+ds-1~bpo10+1
Upstream Author : Jendrik Seipp
* URL : https://rednotebook.app
* License : LGPL
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:50:20PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> At https://packages.debian.org/source/bullseye/gnutls28
> are the packages 'gnutls30' and 'gnutls28-dev'.
>
> And missing to me are the packages 'gnutls28' and 'gnutls30-dev'
Just historical cruft if you ask me.
> But are they tru
7 matches
Mail list logo
