RM: iceme, icepref -- RoQA; orphaned, outdated

retitle 227054 RM: iceme -- RoQA; orphaned, outdated reassign 227054 ftp.debian.org retitle 227077 RM: icepref -- RoQA; orphaned, outdated reassign 227077 ftp.debian.org thanks Please remove iceme and icepref. * Orphaned for two and a half years. Adopter agrees with removal:

RM: uncc -- RoQA; orphaned, unusable

retitle 314672 RM: uncc -- RoQA; orphaned, unusable reassign 314672 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove uncc. * Orphaned for a year. * Fails for a hello world program. * Last upstream release two and a half years ago: * p

Bug#380575: RM: passivetex -- RoM; RC buggy, almost no users

Package: ftp.debian.org According to popcon there are no votes... the package has RC bugs, last uploaded in 2004. Original Message Subject: Re: Is passivetex still being maintained? Resent-Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 17:27:43 -0500 (CDT) Resent-From: debian-qa@lists.debian.org Date:

RM: nsmon -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, better alternatives

retitle 327623 RM: nsmon -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, better alternatives reassign 327623 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove nsmon. * Orphaned for 10 months. * Previous maintainer was also upstream; last non-QA upload in 2002. * More elaborate alternatives: nagios, mon, monit

RM: psys -- RoQA; orphaned, unused

retitle 354496 RM: psys -- RoQA; orphaned, unused reassign 354496 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove psys. * Orphaned for 5 months. * Its only reverse dependency, chipmunk-log, was removed in September 2005. * Last upstream release a year ago:

RM: rfb -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, alternatives available

retitle 364347 RM: rfb -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, alternatives available reassign 364347 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove rfb. * Orphaned for 3 months. * Upstream sites no longer exist. * The previous maintainer says: "all the functionality is now provided by the vnc4

Re: Is passivetex still being maintained?

On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 08:46:52AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > If it's not being maintained, I intend to request removal of the > package from unstable. The most recent version of the package is > present in 'stable', so this incurs no loss of data and the package > is easy to revive. (FWIW,

Bug#380440: ddpo: could use all uids on key for regularly maintained

severity: wishlist package: qa.debian.org Hi, could packages (co-) maintained with uids on the key in the Debian keyring be shown as such (e.g. my Debian account is tviehmann but I use my regular mail address for uploads, so q.d.o/d?login=tviehmann looks "wrong")? Kind regards T. -- Thomas Vie