RM: pgaccess -- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream

retitle 349243 RM: pgaccess -- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream reassign 349243 ftp.debian.org thanks As Peter said in April: > pgaccess is not developed anymore. Unless someone has a really convincing > case, I think this should be removed. Users will find analogous > functionality in pgadmin3.

RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better

retitle 349833 RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better reassign 349833 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove ud. * Orphaned for 6 months. * Upstream URL no longer works: * uptimed does the same thing better. * popcon: 261 install

Bug#381121: http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html outdated

Package: qa.debian.org hasn't been rebuilt since July 22 (possibly because of the move to SVN?). Cheers, Matej -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better

On 2 Aug 2006, at 09:44, Matej Vela wrote: retitle 349833 RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better reassign 349833 ftp.debian.org thanks I think we should remove ud. * Orphaned for 6 months. * Upstream URL no longer works: * uptimed do

Re: RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better

Matthew Vernon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 2 Aug 2006, at 09:44, Matej Vela wrote: > >> I think we should remove ud. >[...] > > I, for one, still use this, haven't had a problem with it for years, > and would be sad to see it go. None of the bugs against it are show- > stoppers, either. Plea

Re: RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 10:44 +0200, Matej Vela wrote: > * Orphaned for 6 months. > * Upstream URL no longer works: > > * uptimed does the same thing better. > * popcon: 261 installs, 177 votes. As discussed earlier on this list: if the package isn't particu

Re: RM: ud -- RoQA; orphaned, no upstream, uptimed is better

Le mer 2 août 2006 13:11, Matej Vela a écrit : > Matthew Vernon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On 2 Aug 2006, at 09:44, Matej Vela wrote: > >> I think we should remove ud. > > > >[...] > > > > I, for one, still use this, haven't had a problem with it for > > years, and would be sad to see it go. N

Bug#381121: http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html outdated

* Matej Vela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-02 12:15]: > Package: qa.debian.org > > hasn't been rebuilt since July 22 > (possibly because of the move to SVN?). No, because a wml file leads to errors. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRI

Re: New QA members

On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 06:47:45PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Thu, July 27, 2006 15:33, Christoph Berg wrote: > > The QA team has added new members to the 'qa' unix group: > > Great, but what does that mean specifically? That they have now write permission to QA maintained infrastructure,

Re: Bug#357020: dict-wn: could not be installed when runningalternative for dictd

* Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-01 17:13]: > > What would you think about stop building the dict-wn package? > > Well, I'd really like for Bob Hilliard to comment given that he > maintains dict. Bob pointed out to me in private that I had the wrong Hilliard. CCing Kirk now. :) --