Re: copyright guidance

On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:20:26PM -0500, John Lightsey wrote: > A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the > upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian > without heavy modification of the upstream version. I'm not going to say > exac

Re: RFS (again): Perl Oak Component Tree and Forest Web Application Builder

On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:10:51PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > packaged the entire library and the application, now I need a sponsor http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html Specifically, WHAT EXACTLY DOES YOUR PACKAGE DO? Think of this e-mail as your TV ad. It's all you reall

Re: RFS (again): Perl Oak Component Tree and Forest Web Application Builder

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:18:45PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Ok, sorry about the misinformation... here goes a description: And now my interest is well and truly peaked - and probably a few other people's, as well. My time for sponsorship is limited at the moment, though (and apologies to my r

Re: Trying to reactivate myself

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 09:26:07PM +0200, Magos?nyi ?rp?d wrote: > The current problem is that I do not have a pgp key in the database, > so I cannot reactivate my account. I guess I have to send my key > -which is signed by other debian developer(s)- to someone. But whom? I think it's [EMAIL PRO

Re: RFS: kbtin (try #2)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 02:04:26AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > Windows users typically use zMud and Mushclient, and among Unix people the > most popular one is ancient tinyfugue -- dead upstream for 4 years I'm sorry, but you've just tripped my FUD-o-meter. TF is not dead upstream, there was

Re: Orphaned Packages With Wrong Maintainer

On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 04:02:12PM -0400, Alexander Winston wrote: > Hi, I came across http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html> yesterday and > am interested in helping in any way that I can, but I am not a Debian > developer and could not find any directions to follow in the > documentation related to

Re: ITP Timeframe

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 12:40:12AM +0100, Martin List-Petersen wrote: > What would be an appropriate timeframe from the point, where you file an > ITP until the first package arrives in sid ? What is custom ? As soon as practicable. It's hard to put any hard limits on it - you should file the ITP

Re: RFS: ldap-account-manager

On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 06:51:31PM +0100, Roland Gruber wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for LDAP Account Manager. > The ITP bug number is 208406. > Homepage: http://www.sf.net/projects/lam > Source package (0.4-2): > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-all/ldap-account-

Re: config.sub and config.guess | .diff.gz bloat

On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 02:42:59PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > Should I email this to the debhelper script maintainer? > > Only if you want me to bounce it to the maintainer of the package that > actually put those lines there. Be careful - he may think that's a valid way

Re: config.sub and config.guess | .diff.gz bloat

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:37:25AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 09:41, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 02:42:59PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > > Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > > Should I email this to the debhelper script mainta

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:07:46PM -0600, David Segonds wrote: > 1. Even though, Architecture was set to 'all' in debian/packages, the > 'changes' file I obtain is tagged with 'i386'. Is this normal? The same > thing happen when I repackage phpmyadmin. Yes. The changes file will always be tagged

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 04:48:51PM -0600, David Segonds wrote: > I am sure they will. The question is how I can achieve that simply. I > need to research how other packages are dealing with this. Especially > when packages are upgraded. Typically you ask the appropriate questions, and then in the

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:06:59PM -0600, David Segonds wrote: > As a newbie, ignoring lintian advices does not seem the right thing to > do for some reasons. :) Indeed. However, they're programatic warnings, which can't handle every eventuality. Think of them like "unless you can think of a rea

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 09:51:22PM -0600, David Segonds wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:46:35AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > What's to heavily modify? I presume the config file is a fairly reasonable > > format, in which case a search 'n replace

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:23:24PM -0600, David Segonds wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 05:37:02PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > If you mean producing a template file with tags which you macro-replace at > > configuration time, that's also done, and works well eno

Re: Packaging phpLDAPadmin. Newbie's questions.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 09:32:48AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:46:35 +1100, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > the user hasn't used debconf to make the change. To cover that > > circumstance, I've started to make a file contain

Re: sponsors?

On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:02:47AM +0100, Marco Massari Calderone wrote: > i requested a sponsor in the correct pagenow, to know if someone What correct page? There are plenty of places where potential sponsors hang out, but I'm not aware of any truly official place to request sponsorship - t

Re: sponsors?

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 09:23:32AM +1100, An?bal Monsalve Salazar wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 07:11:03PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > >On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:02:47AM +0100, Marco Massari Calderone wrote: > >>i requested a sponsor in the correct pagenow,

Re: sponsors?

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:20:21AM +0100, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:57:01AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > Quick hand check. Of all people willing to sponsor others, who actually > > checks that page regularly to find people to sponsor? > >

Re: sponsors?

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 12:09:12PM +0100, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote: > I thought that a page like the ITP, RFP overviews would be enough > http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged > http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/requested OK, that works for me. I like that a lot. > But then again a ta

Re: sponsors?

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 01:59:54PM +0100, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:24:34PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > No it wouldn't. Once a regular sponsor was found, the bug would be closed > > and the sponsor and sponsee would go their merry ways. &

Re: Sponsor for new applicant - packaging Balance

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 07:45:14PM +, James Jeffrey wrote: > I'm looking for a sponsor to look over a package I have created of the http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html. What is it, where can we get it, etc etc. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] wi

Re: RFS: fai-bootcd

On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 12:22:10PM +0800, Niall Young wrote: > > The emphasis here is on using FAI's class mechanism as a complete > *description* of any host. I'm more interested in using class definitions > to create a host, than in extracting a class or filesystem from an > existing host. The

Re: How to deal with sql-database structures on upgrade

Marc Haber said: > On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:05:12 +0100, Thorsten Sauter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Cacti use a mysql database to store the configuration values (including >>users/password, graphic options, layouts, ...). The new upstream >>version (0.8.x) use a completly new designed database st

Re: Need a sponsor for my konversation package

Nathaniel W. Turner said: > Wow, Konversation sure is a great IRC client! It would sure be great > if it were in Debian What? You think so too? You're a DD? > Splendid! Consider sponsoring my package: [...] > P.S. I was going to put "Single IRC client package seeks caring DD for > uplo

Re: RFS: proxycheck

On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:02:41PM +0300, Al Nikolov wrote: > Hi, all > > Looking for sponsor for a new package: > > I'll help you out with this one, but it'll have to wait until after the 18th when I get back from Li

Re: Debian and Oracle

On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 11:21:50PM +0100, Patrick Geschinski wrote: > So my question is why doesnt't Oracle certify his product for Debian ? > What's the obstacle ? Oracle want the OS vendor to supply people, at the OS vendors' cost, to staff the Oracle support center. There are also lots of othe

Re: Need an advocate

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 07:28:49PM -0600, Matthew A. Nicholson wrote: > I am in search of someone who will agree to advocate me to become a debian http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html Specifically "There is no point asking for an advocate on debian-mentors" and the question

Re: Need an advocate

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 09:24:33PM -0600, Matthew A. Nicholson wrote: > >If bootsplash is what I think it > >is, however, you may have a potential sponsor and advocate in yours > >truly. > > What do you think it is? (bootsplash.org) Considering that you gave no useful information in your origina

Re: RFS: hatari

On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:08:14AM +, Colin Watson wrote: > components to be specified, in this example "2.3.0". All four > components may still be used if someone wishes to do so. Or if your package only complies with a spelling mistake. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EM

Re: RFS: apt-best

On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 02:32:54PM +0100, chatiman wrote: > apt-best is a utility which helps the user in finding the most populars > debian packages. > For that it uses the scores found on freshmeat (more sources to come) for > exemple and link them to the debian package archive. > It is licensed

Re: Sponsor not responding

On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 02:34:43PM +0100, Roland Gruber wrote: > I am maintainer of the ldap-account-manager package. It came into Debian > in November 2003 and is sponsored by Matthew Palmer. > The problem is that since the end of December Matthew did not reply to > my mails. There

Re: Is this sufficient for an application?

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 08:37:22PM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > IANADD myself. But from reading mailing lists, I think the sentiment of many > is that getting an account on the Debian machines should be a question of > 'is it necessary for your work'? This is something I've

Re: Is this sufficient for an application?

On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 09:11:25PM +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: > However, I hope this helps - some suggestions and bug reports: Bug reports don't make a good application. They are things which can be quite reasonably carried out by users. Now, marketing on behalf of Debian, where being a "

Sponsorship guidelines

This is a (very small) part of the reason I haven't been doing sponsorships with the appropriate amount of vigour lately - I've been working on a more automated and standardised approach to my sponsor work. I've got a bit of a pseudo upload queue happening, and I've got some behind-the-scenes scri

Sponsorship guidelines - addendum

Of course, it would be useful if I gave the URL to the guidelines: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/sponsorship.html (sigh) it's been a long day. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:21:49AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > You must be intending to join the Debian project at some point in the > > future. I see sponsorship as a step to becoming a DD, not an end in > > and of itself. You may not have a specific timeline for applying, but > > if you t

Re: Sponsorship guidelines

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 12:35:19PM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Two quick things on the checklist: > - Maybe do add a quirk that the prospective packager should (or even say must) > have read the canonical docs (policy, d.'s r., n

Re: Help with my program

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 11:07:25PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote: > How can this program placed in the debian distribution? > I read the documentation (maint-guide, developer-guide), but i am not > really shure how it works. > Can someone (a Maintainer) help me? FAQ-man to the rescue! http://people.deb

Re: Looking for sponsor : xmail

On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:21:31AM +, Radu Spineanu wrote: > Did anyone have any problems with this package ? Settle down. It does take some time to go over a package, especially one as large as an MTA. I'm sure you'll receive comments in due course. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E

Re: cryptoloop-source, anyone taking over?

On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:19:16AM +0100, Juergen Strobel wrote: > The PTS shows cryptoloop-source to be orphaned, with a note that > someone is intending to take over. The note is quite old now and > references a bugreport which gives no further clues. Have you attempted to contact Vincent Bernat

Re: RFS[4]: popfile -- Email classification tool

On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 02:47:00AM -0300, Lucas Wall wrote: > Hi! I'm still looking for a sponsor for the popfile[1] package I made. Interesting. Have a look at http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/sponsorship.html, and if you like, contact me privately and we can discuss sponsorship. - Matt --

Re: Initial Questions

On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 11:16:28PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: > I want to adopt an orphaned package, but haven't worked with packages > yet. Before I go in a completely wrong direction: Is the Debian New > Maintainers' Guide (package maint-guide) a good way to start? Yep. Move from there onto t

Multi-person sponsorship

Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a "helps me" thing to a "could help lots of people" thing. The comment was along the lines of "wouldn't it be cool if we could remove the SPOF of sponsors, and have a group of p

Re: applying patches

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 03:04:39PM +0200, Radu Spineanu wrote: > I have to apply a small patch to my xmail package, > however > i ran into different opinions while looking on how > to do this. > Some suggested dbs, others dpatch, others just > applying the > patch dirrectly to the source. >

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:11:08PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > Prompted by a comment made by one of my potential sponsees, I've been > > reworking my semi-automated sponsorship queue from a "helps me" thing to a > > "could help lots of people" thing. The comment was along the lines of >

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 08:45:00AM -0700, Jamin W. Collins wrote: > > The final question I'd like feedback on is this: how many sponsors > > would consider pointing their sponsees to this service, rather than > > whatever methods you're using now? The benefits are that other > > sponsors might occ

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:22:22AM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19.52, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > > Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > Having a new-maintainer keyring, to which keys could get added by any > > > AM after it has been verified, and chec

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:21:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Matthew Palmer wrote: > > So, comments, brickbats, acclaim, whatever. Throw it at me. > > Well I don't think that this system as described would be of any use to > me. I want to maintain a close relationship w

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >2) Download tracking, both by count and "yes I'll upload this" via web > >browser. I'm still up in the air about whether there will be apt-getable

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:23:05AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > > It'll probably be more timely and less bandwidth intensive to track -changes... > Well, I mostly have Packages/Sources for unstable available. In my book, I prefer > parsing those over automatically processing email. Also, it does

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:39:31AM +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:42:42PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:08:34AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > > > Maybe you could also reuse / build upon rene from the dak suit

Re: Multi-person sponsorship

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:05:08PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > package I sponsor. I want to know if they are not able to send me a > > > package that will build properly. I want to work with them and be > > > > Since you only get packages

Re: RFS: BinClock - binary clock

On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 01:29:50AM +0100, Nico Golde wrote: > I think it should be in because its a nice toy and you can practise your > math skills and your brain. Not to mention that watching the binary digits tick over can be quite hypnotic. I have no particular need for a software binary cl

Re: RFS: BinClock - binary clock

On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 01:35:23PM +0100, Eike zyro Sauer wrote: > Matthew Palmer schrieb: > > I have no particular need for a software binary clock, though, as I've got > > a breadboard of LEDs doing the job for me. > > Are you going to package it? ;o) I could p

Re: ITA with already removed packages

On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 12:49:54PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > > libming currently has two grave bugs, one of which indicates that it > > needs source changes to make it work with the current PHP API. > > Unless you can address all of these (upstream presumed dead and the > grave bugs), you sh

Re: Need a sponsor to upload #234303

On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 02:38:53PM -0300, Everton da Silva Marques wrote: > This is my first Debian package. > > The bug report for the package is here: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=234303 > > The tentative package files are here: > http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/ruli/

Re: Need a sponsor to upload #234303

On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 05:25:05PM -0300, Everton da Silva Marques wrote: > The usual description for the RULI package is: > > RULI stands for Resolver User Layer Interface. It's > a library built on top of an asynchronous DNS stub > resolver. RULI provides an easy-to-use interface > for q

Re: RFS: pdfmerge

On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 09:39:57PM +0100, Philipp Gortan wrote: > Should the perl script be in the "i386" architecture, or the "any"? Have a quick look at some other perl scripts, and see what they've got. And read the Debian Perl Policy, I would imagine it'd have some words of wisdom. - Matt

Re: Need a sponsor to upload #234303

On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 07:44:43PM -0300, Everton da Silva Marques wrote: > I do intend to push the library, but I actually don't > have a map of Debian applications which use SRV > records. I'm planning to contact those applications > (i.e. their maintainers) as soon as I find them, > but I would

Re: RFS: pdfmerge

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:33:39AM +0100, Philipp Gortan wrote: > >The proper place for the script (after doing things right) is > >ghostscript upstream. Take a look at pdf2ps and try to get your program > >next to that. There's no reason to produce packages for a one liner. > > ok, so we know the

Re: RFS: pdfmerge

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 01:23:39PM +0800, Didier Casse wrote: > On 02/03/04, at 15:31 +0100, Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There's no reason to produce packages for a one liner. > > As for your "another way of doing things": Just because there's not one > > exclusive right way doe

Re: pdfmerge

Ben Young wrote: > Yeah... but it was said in a quite arrogant manner. Matthew Palmer said > things neatly in his first email (which I think everybody understood > correctly!), then I didn't quite like the tone of his second one. Just Yeah, the second one was a little over the

Re: looking for a sponsorship in schooling

On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 01:27:39PM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > What strikes me as odd is why people think they will get any kind of > scholarship (which seems to be the objective) with such a mail. It's like spam. They send an e-mail to anything that vaguely resembles an e-mail address within

Re: can a non-buildable part remain in source

On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:32:03PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > I have a package that has an optional part that cannot presently be > built in main but ships a (java bytecode) binary in the tarball. > Policy prevents me from adding this to the binary debs, but my > understanding of policy is tha

Re: PHP/MySQL package

On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 01:55:21PM -0600, David Moreno Garza wrote: > In the documentation I been searching, I just can find some resources > with packaging which need to be compilated or so. In the package I would > need to set up a new MySQL database (I vaguely know I could use > wwwconfig, but n

Re: can a non-buildable part remain in source

On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 07:38:45AM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:32:03PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > >> I have a package that has an optional part that cannot presently be > >> built in main

Re: Where shoud I put my public key?

On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 07:37:24PM -0800, Number Six wrote: > > gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --send-key [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Okay, I did that. Is there a canonical-Debian way to point the world > there to verify it? So they'll actually trust the .dsc? > > Or do I just do that in an out-of-ba

Re: should main package binary manpage be symlinked to package name?

On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 08:29:08PM -0800, Number Six wrote: > If the main binary in a package is named "x" and the package is named > "x-package", should I ship > > (a) a manpage x.1 ? > (b) a manpage x-package.[1-9]? > > I'm pretty sure of (a). I think the answer to (b) is no, but I'm not > s

Re: reactivate myself

On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:22:01AM -0500, Brian Russo wrote: > Looking to reactivate myself, gradually. > Can someone point me to the current procedure, Thanks. Since you're still in db.debian.org, and not listed as an emeritus or disabled maintainer, I think all you'd have to do is get a new key

Re: reactivate myself

On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 02:05:08AM -0500, Brian Russo wrote: > At Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 05:20:14PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > Since you're still in db.debian.org, and not listed as an emeritus or > > disabled maintainer, I think all you'd have to do is get a new k

Re: reactivate myself

On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 05:06:04AM -0500, Brian Russo wrote: > Seriously though, Any AM's around? It's not an AM you've got to convince, though. Front Desk and the keyring maintainer would be the people you'd have to convince that whatever authentication method you were going to use was appropr

Re: Need a sponsor to upload #234303

On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 12:50:24AM -0300, Everton da Silva Marques wrote: > I'm unsure on how to apply licensing terms to RULI > (GNU GPL) > plus this recently created PHP4-binding. Do we have > compatibility issues with the PHP license? Since your library is under the GPL, I presume that the PHP4

Re: Versioning question

On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 12:55:33PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote: > The version for this release is 0.70-rc, and upstream says the next > release will be 0.70. The obvious problem is: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg --compare-versions 0.70-rc-1 lt 0.70-1 && echo yes > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ > > That won't

Re: Need a sponsor to upload Bug#237028

On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:09:53PM +0200, Martin-?ric Racine wrote: > Subject says it all. Feel free to ask any clarification question. The effort involved in going to the bug report and have a good read isn't likely to be expended if I don't have any interest in the package. You might get a bet

Re: RFS: Bug#237028 cups-pdf - PDF printer backend for CUPS

On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:35:32PM +0200, Martin-?ric Racine wrote: > On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:09:53PM +0200, Martin-?ric Racine wrote: > > > Subject says it all. Feel free to ask any clarification question. > >

Re: Q: why dpkg-buildpackage unsets +x for file that is in /usr/share/doc/$name/* ?

On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 03:22:12PM +0200, Art??ras ??lajus wrote: > I am building package and file "ec" in /usr/share/doc/echat/ isn't > executable. > It's an script and makefile installs it with mode 755. What could be wrong? Probably the fact that documentation is very rarely supposed to be exe

Re: expired key

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 11:53:36AM +0100, KELEMEN Peter wrote: > [ Please Cc: answers as I'm not subscribed. Thanks. ] > > I was about to vote when I realized that my GPG key has expired > exactly one year ago. In private communications this didn't pose > a problem, but chaning Debian password f

Re: About Package Creation... (sarge vs sid)

On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 06:12:52PM -0700, Benjamin Cutler wrote: > Just how important is it that a package be created on a box running sid? > I'm currently running sarge, and would like to package a program myself > instead of waiting for somebody else, but I'm not sure I want to start > running

Re: lintian and statically link binaries

ly to be tapping into libc for much... -- ----------- #include Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Sponsor request

ll check the packages you want inserted into the archive and then upload them on your behalf. But we need to know what you're packaging. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [binary+libs] or [binary] + [libs]

ning the binaries, depending on the shared library package. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: developer vs user wants

rcial products what we want in Debian? Where are these advertisers coming from? The first porn site that gets advertised via debian software probably isn't a long way off if we walk down this path. Package: debian-jr Conflicts: limewire -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: developer vs user wants

On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Ben Armstrong wrote: > On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 01:53:42PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > Package: debian-jr > > Conflicts: limewire > > > > > > Ack! While realizing this is humour, I do feel I have to clear up a bit of a > misconcep

Re: Looking for information about finding sponsors.

Don't be offended if they ignore you or decline - sponsoring *does* take time (I know, I sponsor a couple of people) and everybody is very busy these days. Perseverence will win through in the end. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: dealing with dead projects

u. Brutal, but there aren't a lot of alternatives. Maybe someone would take it on as a personal interest learning project, but your chances of getting top-quality from that are pretty slim. -- ----------- #include Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence http://ieee.uow.edu.au/~mjp16

Re: dealing with dead projects

ver folks that they pick up > that code and dust it off. That's probably the best option. The icecast people might keep it going on the idea that if there's good XMMS support, more people are likely to use icecast. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: advocate location

have physical contact for is your keysigning. This page may help: http://www.debian.org/devel/join/nm-step2#key_signature -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: Looking for sponsor for: libapache-mod-sqlinclude, hd-dma

f rules. It's a niggly thing, but there's no point leaving them in there. And I think I've ripped your packagin skills to bits enough for one day. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: Looking for a Sponsor

st, unfortunately, you got beaten to the punch. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: Looking for a Sponsor

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Shiju p. Nair wrote: > Just noticed it. I somehow got false information that its not possible > to ITP a package without first getting a sponsor. So I packaged phpbb and > sent Anyone can file a bug; an ITP or RFP is no different in that regard. It's a little haphaz

Re: RFC: Sponsor request convention

On 24 Nov 2002, Rob Bradford wrote: > I think it would be nice to achieve some kind of convention on the > format of messages requesting sponsors for packages. Not a bad idea, on the whole. Feel like writing this up in a webpage somewhere, sort of a "Requesting Sponsorship HOWTO". That way, any

Re: On replacing orphaned packages

modules won't be overly disadvantaged by their disappearance - they weren't getting updates for the module anyway, and it's not as though apt removes packages from your system just because they're no longer in the archive... -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: On replacing orphaned packages

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > As far as I can tell, no modules depend on it - Maybe I am searching for > this the wrong way, but... There's an apt-cache command which shows reverse depends... Aah, there it is, showpkg. Run that over any package, and it'll show you Reverse Depends (am

Re: files in .deb

dpkg If you want to supply a concrete example, I'm happy to discuss specifics on the list. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org

Re: greetings! - PennMUSH debian package

On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Titus Barik wrote: > 1. Is the license for PennMUSH okay? If it's standard artistic, then yes. > 2. Is there any interest for such a package? >From the incredibly long list of "Packages of Dubious Interest" (which I can't find now, but which was very funny when

Re: search/get bug database, rc bugs excuses, closing bugs

sing. Good idea. I can't offer any help (free time? what's that? says I) but I can offer a hearty "best of luck!". -- ----------- #include Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence http://ieee.uow.edu.au/~mjp16

Re: Should I sign up for New Maintainer even though I don't have an advodcate?

[This is probably going to sound hypocritical coming from a DD, or excessively harsh, but try and stick with me] On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, B. Douglas Hilton wrote: > I would really like to be a contributing member of Debian, > but it is the chicken and egg thing. I can't help until I > become a member,

Re: Should I sign up for New Maintainer even though I don't have an advodcate?

On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, B. Douglas Hilton wrote: > I really could give a ratt's a$$ about a Debian email address, that is > the least of my concerns. Just what I don't need is another email address. Well, that's a start. I was hard on the issue of the e-mail address because it's an easy analogy...

Re: Asking for an advocate (gURLChecker) ...

On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Daniel Pecos wrote: > I would like to become a debian developer, so I have read all > the recommended docs on debian web page, and created a > deb package for a program. Now I need an advocate in order to go > through new maintainer process as said in n

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >