NCO maintainer MIA

2004-06-23 Thread Charlie Zender
Hi, I'm Charlie Zender, primary author of the netCDF Operators (NCO). Brian Mays maintained the Debian NCO package for a number of years until about two years ago. We thank him for pioneering NCO in Debian. However, Brian has not kept track with the upstream version for about two years. We (anothe

Re: some tiny tool proposal

2004-06-23 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 10:15:18AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > Second suggestion -- add another 'not of release quality' status, so the > release team and QA can find packages to remove. And then I go poking, and find I can do it myself. Ignore this one. - Matt

Re: some tiny tool proposal

2004-06-23 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 06:13:25PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > I built this really small page : > http://amaretto.inria.fr:8080/diogenes/site/qa_debian/ Schaweet! > listing all _source_ package that are atm in sarge and not in sarge > (with a little diff on the Sources.gz files of the two dis

guile-oops

2004-06-23 Thread Andrew Pollock
Egads! So I go to try and prepare a QA upload of guile-oops to orphan it properly, and it's currently a native package. I just converted visualos to a non-native package, so I figure I'll have a go with guile-oops. The bloody thing's got a tarball inside its source tarball. What should I do in th

Maybe remove premail...

2004-06-23 Thread Andrew Pollock
Hi, premail has a few old, functional bugs open. It's in contrib, hasn't been changed since woody released, and I can't find it's upstream. I think you can achieve similar functionality with gnupg and mixmaster. Maybe we should just remove this package? regards Andrew

Re: visualos

2004-06-23 Thread Andrew Pollock
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 08:52:01AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > > > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > > > also the upstream developer

Re: visualos

2004-06-23 Thread Andrew Pollock
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > > also the upstream developer (it's a SourceForge project). > > > > So should I convert this to a no

Bug#255920: packages.qa.debian.org: package names should be URL-encoded

2004-06-23 Thread Kobayashi Noritada
Package: qa.debian.org Version: N/A; reported 2004-06-24 Severity: normal Some links are broken in the overview page for the gtk+2.0 source package (http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gtk+2.0.html) because "gtk+2.0" is used directly as a part of URL in those links. "+" should be URL-encoded as "%2B".

Re: some tiny tool proposal

2004-06-23 Thread Pierre HABOUZIT
i forgot : if you are interested in such a tool, my first item on the todo list is to improve the usability of the package list (with an appropriate browsing of the database and not this ugly full list) -- Pierre Habouzit http://www.madism.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature

some tiny tool proposal

2004-06-23 Thread Pierre HABOUZIT
Hi, first thing, I'm not yet a DD and new in this list. I'm interested in QA work, and want te become a DD, so after some private talk with M. Palmer, he gave me as an advice to work on the actual work on package to be orphaned / removed I built this really small page : http://amaretto.inria.fr:8

Re: visualos

2004-06-23 Thread Colin Watson
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > > also the upstream developer (it's a SourceForge project). > > > > So should I convert this to a no

Re: Maybe remove gnomba?

2004-06-23 Thread Martin Michlmayr
reassign 249831 ftp.debian.org retitle 249831 Please remove gnomba thanks * Raymond Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-22 22:28]: > > Apparently gnomba's dead upstream, and it's got a fair few open > > bugs. > > > > I believe Samba browsing is a built in function of GNOME these > > days, so this p

Re: visualos

2004-06-23 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > > also the upstream developer (it's a SourceForge project). > > > > So should I convert this to a no

Re: gg2 release quality

2004-06-23 Thread Martin Michlmayr
reassign 250078 ftp.debian.org retitle 250078 Please remove gg2 thanks * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:52]: > IMO gg2 isn't release quality, and should be at least removed from > Sarge if not the archive altogether, based on #251960. It was never part of a stable release, so I

Re: Remove trustees?

2004-06-23 Thread Martin Michlmayr
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:49]: > I think we can probably remove trustees: > > * orphaned > * upstream dead > * same functionality available in POSIX ACLs Let's ask the person who orphaned it, but this sounds pretty reasonable to me. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: visualos

2004-06-23 Thread Martin Michlmayr
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > also the upstream developer (it's a SourceForge project). > > So should I convert this to a normal style package instead? Is it as > straightforward as renaming the tarba