George Danchev wrote:
> Well right, but I have my reasoing for the new upstream release
> described here:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2006/07/msg00201.html
I never said newest upstream was a bad idea ;)
I just didn't want an NMU, but a new maintainer :)
> Sure. Anyway I prepared a -1
On Saturday 15 July 2006 16:22, Amaya wrote:
> Hi George,
>
> George Danchev wrote:
> > It is already done.
>
> I took a look at you rpackage today, and the changelog:
>
> * Non-maintainer upload.
> * New upstream release. (Closes: #338451)
>
> I think if you are going to package a newer Upstr
Hi George,
George Danchev wrote:
> It is already done.
I took a look at you rpackage today, and the changelog:
* Non-maintainer upload.
* New upstream release. (Closes: #338451)
I think if you are going to package a newer Upstream version, which is
completely out of scope for an NMU, you s
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> It would help if the MIA team then orphaned all his packages at once
> to make their status clear.
There is still some steps that need to happen before doing this, as he
was responsive to mia pings last March.
--
.''`. Fuck your fascist beauty standards
: :
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 10:25 +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> The maintainer was long ago reported as MIA.
>
> Please make ypourself the new maintainer. There is no need to to have
> your name as uploader in this case.
It would help if the MIA team then orphaned all his packages at once to
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 06:31:34PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
>Advice: I've been told to consult the QA team for advice and for formal MIA
>tracking. If the package is to be left in the cold, I'm ready to take it over
>adding myself to Uploaders:, while the original Maintainer: will remain as i
On Friday 14 July 2006 21:57, Amaya wrote:
> George Danchev wrote:
> > Good. Let's do that as real NMU first, i.e. with Polkan as maintainer
> > and let him has his last chance to respond. For the next upload I will
> > add myself in Uploaders, along with keeping him in Maintainer: also.
>
> Great
George Danchev wrote:
> Good. Let's do that as real NMU first, i.e. with Polkan as maintainer
> and let him has his last chance to respond. For the next upload I will
> add myself in Uploaders, along with keeping him in Maintainer: also.
Great solution. Please ping me when you are ready.
--
.''
I am also contacting the sponsor of shc too.
--
.''`. Fuck your fascist beauty standards
: :' :
`. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux
`- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subje
On Friday 14 July 2006 21:06, Amaya wrote:
> Hi there, George (and Polkan)
Hello,
> George Danchev wrote:
> > Advice: I've been told to consult the QA team for advice and for
> > formal MIA tracking. If the package is to be left in the cold, I'm
> > ready to take it over adding myself to Uplo
Hi there, George (and Polkan)
George Danchev wrote:
> Advice: I've been told to consult the QA team for advice and for
> formal MIA tracking. If the package is to be left in the cold, I'm
> ready to take it over adding myself to Uploaders:, while the original
> Maintainer: will remain as it
Hello George,
> Advice: I've been told to consult the QA team for advice and for formal
> MIA
> tracking. If the package is to be left in the cold, I'm ready to take it over
> adding myself to Uploaders:, while the original Maintainer: will remain as it
> is. Well, I'm still in the NM qu
Hello QA Team,
Background: shc package currently [1] in the archive has RC-issues [2],
which
have been resolved by a non-DD NMU [3]. No packages depend on shc package.
Sponsors welcome. As you can see the last upload happend back in 21 Oct 2004.
The RC has been filed 23 Oct 2005 with n
13 matches
Mail list logo
