Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-09 Thread Utkarsh Gupta
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 4:25 AM Cédric Boutillier wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:18:45AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > > > Also, please strike it off the to-do list once it is updated and > uploaded. > > Or let me know, I'll just strike that off. > > I've uploaded nokogiri 1.10 to unstable.

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-09 Thread Cédric Boutillier
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:18:45AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > Also, please strike it off the to-do list once it is updated and uploaded. > Or let me know, I'll just strike that off. I've uploaded nokogiri 1.10 to unstable. As it might take me too long to find the todo list for diaspora, can I

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-09 Thread Utkarsh Gupta
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:19 PM Cédric Boutillier wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 04:21:57AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > > > Since this is new to me, I think I would need help here. > > I am totally clueless on how to include the tests under spec using the > > steps mentioned in the issue threa

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-09 Thread Cédric Boutillier
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 04:21:57AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > Since this is new to me, I think I would need help here. > I am totally clueless on how to include the tests under spec using the > steps mentioned in the issue thread. If you don't mind, I will take over. I think that rebasing my b

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-08 Thread Utkarsh Gupta
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:58 PM Cédric Boutillier wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 08:43:01AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > > > There was a version update in the upstream, that is, 1.10.0. > > And I updated the package as per that. > > Although the build is passing and is lintian clean, I

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-08 Thread Cédric Boutillier
Hi! On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 08:43:01AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > There was a version update in the upstream, that is, 1.10.0. > And I updated the package as per that. > Although the build is passing and is lintian clean, I am sure the problem > still exists, right? > So I think we could crea

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-07 Thread Utkarsh Gupta
Hi Cédric, On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:33 AM Cédric Boutillier wrote: > Hi Utkarsh, > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 01:49:10AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > > Hi,I've updated the Debian package of the Ruby gem *nokogiri*. The > > package wastested on sbuild and was successfully built. It was also > > l

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2019-01-03 Thread Cédric Boutillier
Hi Utkarsh, On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 01:49:10AM +0530, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > Hi,I've updated the Debian package of the Ruby gem *nokogiri*. The > package wastested on sbuild and was successfully built. It was also > lintian clean. > I've updated the package in the salsa repo which may be found at

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri 1.8.2-1

2018-02-19 Thread Georg Faerber
Hi, On 18-02-20 00:46:39, Cédric Boutillier wrote: > Thanks for this update. Thanks for your review. > I was just wondering why you removed the Testsuite field in the control > file and added a debian/tests/control file. > > The autopkgtest-pkg-ruby value of the Testsuite: field is a way to > c

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri 1.8.2-1

2018-02-19 Thread Cédric Boutillier
Hi, Thanks for this update. I was just wondering why you removed the Testsuite field in the control file and added a debian/tests/control file. The autopkgtest-pkg-ruby value of the Testsuite: field is a way to centralise the default instructions for autopkgtests for Ruby packages, and to my kn

Re: RFS: ruby-nokogiri

2012-05-14 Thread Gunnar Wolf
Cédric Boutillier dijo [Sun, May 13, 2012 at 12:25:33AM +0200]: > Hi! > > I've updated ruby-nokogiri repository to a newer version. It is lintian > clean and builds fine with cowbuilder. > Here is the changelog entry for this new version. Uploaded. Greetings, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi