Re: the web pages

1999-12-13 Thread Michael Stone
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 11:16:22PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 09:59:23PM +, M.C. Vernon wrote: > > I think it should say "Debian Quality Assurance" instead of "the > > Debian Quality Assurance". > > That is gramatically correct or just better style? I think the origin

Re: the web pages

1999-12-13 Thread Josip Rodin
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 09:59:23PM +, M.C. Vernon wrote: > > I've made some changes to the layout and contents of the QA web pages, > > > > http://qa.debian.org/ > > I think it should say "Debian Quality Assurance" instead of "the > Debian Quality Assurance". That is gramatically correct

Re: the web pages

1999-12-13 Thread M.C. Vernon
On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Josip Rodin wrote: > Hi guys, > > I've made some changes to the layout and contents of the QA web pages, > > http://qa.debian.org/ I think it should say "Debian Quality Assurance" instead of "the Debian Quality Assurance". Matthew -- "At least you know where you ar

Re: Release-critical bug inventory

1999-12-13 Thread Christian Kurz
On 99-12-13 Torsten Landschoff wrote: > On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 10:48:13PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote: > > > Did that bot ever get written? I remember work being done on it > > during the last bug-squashing party. > In fact Robo101 (who is he in real life anyway?) wanted to finish the bot >

the web pages

1999-12-13 Thread Josip Rodin
Hi guys, I've made some changes to the layout and contents of the QA web pages, http://qa.debian.org/ Please, visit them, comment, bitch, flame, whatever you feel is appropriate... I do reserve the right to ignore you if you get too violent ;) I've arranged with gecko (Darren Benham) th

Bug#35726: marked as done (dotfile: missing template (bash))

1999-12-13 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Mon, 13 Dec 1999 15:28:06 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Closing. has caused the attached Bug report 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 now your responsibility to reopen

Processed: Re: dotfile-procmail: Doesn't work at all (tcl error?)

1999-12-13 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 52439 normal Bug#52439: dotfile-procmail: Doesn't work at all (tcl error?) Severity set to `normal'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Darren Benham (administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Bug#52439: dotfile-procmail: Doesn't work at all (tcl error?)

1999-12-13 Thread Josip Rodin
severity 52439 normal thanks Hi, > Package: dotfile-procmail > Version: 1.1-2 > Severity: grave > > GUI portion of program does not even appear. Spits out long error. [snip] I was not able to reproduce that error, it starts up just fine. Can you try with re-bytecompiling that module, or not byt

Re: sgml-tools: severity change

1999-12-13 Thread Taketoshi Sano
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, at Fri, 10 Dec 1999 23:43:37 +0900, on sgml-tools: severity change, I wrote: > > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > >Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > # This is a feature request > > > severity 44514 normal > > > > No, since sgml-tools is the

Re: Release-critical bug inventory

1999-12-13 Thread Torsten Landschoff
On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 10:48:13PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote: > Did that bot ever get written? I remember work being done on it > during the last bug-squashing party. In fact Robo101 (who is he in real life anyway?) wanted to finish the bot while I would have done it as well. I never heard