Bug#483596: RM: wmakerconf-data -- RoM/RoQA; now generated by wmakerconf source package

ge. Thanks and best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WWW: http://www.starplot.org/ WWW: http://people.debian.org/~kmccarty/ GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#482102: qa.debian.org: intelligent listing of debian/patches, git/quilt v3 format packages, etc

7;s possible that I am the only person that uses this obscure dpatch feature (I have some scripts to move source code files around during the patch step -- yes, they honor both the -patch and -unpatch flags). So maybe it's easiest not to worry about it too much. best regards, -- Kevin B. McC

wmakerconf orphaned again

to be running Ubuntu so I'm not sure why the reports found their way to the Debian BTS.) best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WWW: http://www.starplot.org/ WWW: http://people.debian.org/~kmccarty/ GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#399186: Debian Package Tracking System: changelog links not working

this. regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscrib

Re: Pavel Wiecek appears to be MIA

es from him on June 12th when I asked about his RC-buggy packages (php4-vpopmail, kernel-patch-time and libvpopmail-perl) - quoted below: Pawel Wiecek wrote: > On Jun 12, 1:26pm, "Kevin B. McCarty" wrote: > >> Dear php4-vpopmail maintainer, >> >> Are you still int

Second follow-up to "52 packages it would be nice to remove"

[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spip Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asterisk-chan-misdn Masato Taruishi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ultrapossum-slapd Debian VoIP Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> yate Florian M. Weps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> libooc-vo best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty &l

Re: Follow-up to "52 packages it would be nice to remove"

Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > "Kevin B. McCarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>After a suitable period of time to collect replies (two weeks), I plan >>to write to the debian-qa mailing list. I'll give a summary of the >>source packages li

Follow-up to "52 packages it would be nice to remove"

RL above for which I received affirmative, negative, and no responses. best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Re: List of 52 packages it would be nice to get rid of

(Roland, here's the context of my email by the way: http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2006/05/msg00026.html ) Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > Kevin B. McCarty wrote: >>* gforge >> >>The most commonly installed binary package, gforge-common, has only 12 >>installation

List of 52 packages it would be nice to get rid of

any binary package with >= 10 votes or installations, and those whose only RC bug(s) were not applicable to Sid, were only for preventing testing propagation, or were < 30 days old. Attached to this email is the script I used to find reverse dependencies and build-dependencies. The ivtool

Re: NMU upload sponsor required for asciijump

that the changes to config.{sub,guess} don't go into the diff -- dpkg-buildpackage ignores the deletion of those files when it creates the diff.gz. regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG:

Requesting NMU of elinks

ce to have this ugly error fixed in sarge (and maybe some others like # 247495 at the least). regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544