Hello mentors,
I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
minor). Is there a way to tag it as such? Or should I just add a message to
the report (I just did) and do nothing else?
I'm just thinking that I could mark it as blocked by some Etch-release
pseudo-bug
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
Hello mentors,
I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
minor). Is there a way to tag it as such? Or should I just add a message to
the report (I just did) and do nothing else?
I'm just
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:34:05AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
minor). Is there a way to tag it as such? Or should I just add a message
to the report (I
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:38:00AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:34:05AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
minor). Is there a way to tag
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.20-1
of my package fslint.
It builds these binary packages:
fslint - A utility to fix problems with filesystems' data, like duplicate
files
The package is lintian clean.
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:15:31 +0100
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason I want to mark this in a computer-readable way (as opposed
to a textual message to the report), is that that would allow
programs to present lists of fixable bugs in a better way.
Whenever I see lists of bugs
Hello,
I'm looking a sponsor for update a new version of libqt-perl
Package Name: libqt-perl
Short description: Perl bindings for the Qt library
URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libqt-perl
Deepak Tripathi
Open Source Developer
.''`.
Am Sonntag, 11. März 2007 schrieb Ricardo Mones:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 09:34:56 +0100
Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Dienstag, 23. Januar 2007 schrieben Sie:
I filed the ITP and it was accepted as:
-
Bug#408099: ITP: mms -- My Media System - a complete Mediasuite
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 13:22, Deepak Kumar Tripathi a écrit :
Hello,
Hi !
I'm looking a sponsor for update a new version of libqt-perl
Package Name: libqt-perl
Short description: Perl bindings for the Qt library
URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libqt-perl
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package otpw.
Package name: otpw
Version : 1.3
Upstream Author : Markus Kuhn
* URL : http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/download/otpw-1.3.tar.gz
* License : GPL2
Description : A One-time password system for
Hi,
I'm looking for a sponsor for the eqonomize package. The description is:
Eqonomize! is a personal accounting software, with focus on efficiency
and ease of use for the small household economy. Eqonomize! provides a
complete solution, with bookkeeping by double entry and support for
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 16:27, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package otpw.
Hi !
Few remarks concerning your package:
* libotpw-dev: Is it mandatory that you ship only a static library ?
* You call dh_installman but in fact you install
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:14:50 +0100
Romain Beauxis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, I for myself recommend cdbs for simple packages since you are
then sure not to forgot any dh_* call (yes, I know you may call
uneeded ones but...) and reduce your rule only to the relevant
parts... But this is
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 05:14:50PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 16:27, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package otpw.
Few remarks concerning your package:
Thanks (-:
* libotpw-dev: Is it mandatory that you ship only a
Hi Matthew,
* Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-14 16:50]:
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package otpw.
Package name: otpw
Version : 1.3
Upstream Author : Markus Kuhn
* URL : http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/download/otpw-1.3.tar.gz
*
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:51:16 +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
you describe here I am not sure how this program
differ from libpam-opie, opie-client and opie-server which
are already in Debian.
What are the differences?
Kind regards
Nico
OTPW is easier to use if you can't/don't want to use a
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 17:47, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
* libotpw-dev: Is it mandatory that you ship only a static library ?
This is consistent with libopie-dev. Upstream doesn't produce a dynamic
library but merely recommends compiling with the .o files directly.
* You call
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 06:44:43PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
* IMPORTANT: Licence is stated only in the html document... You may ask
upstream to include at least a LICENCE or COPYING file, and better add
the licence to each headers in code files...
This is all upstream provides,
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 19:00, vous avez écrit :
Does Debian _actually_ require licence information to be added to every
file? As an upstream I would consider that unreasonable when I have
clearly given the licence elsewhere. If not, what would be sufficient?
Must all upstreams be asked
Is this enough confermation?
Matt
- Forwarded message from Markus Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
To: Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OTPW
From: Markus Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It says GPL on
http://freshmeat.net/projects/otpw/
so must be true ... ;-) That was the intention
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 21:49, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
Is this enough confermation?
No, I fear no..
If I look at the header at file rmd160.c, I get:
/\
*
* FILE: rmd160.c
*
* CONTENTS: A sample
On (14/03/07 22:04), Romain Beauxis wrote:
Le mercredi 14 mars 2007 21:49, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
Is this enough confermation?
No, I fear no..
If I look at the header at file rmd160.c, I get:
Nowhere in this header I can find anything granting right to modify the code.
Furthermore,
I sent the following message to my sponsor, but haven't heard back yet.
I welcome any assistance anyone can provide.
Thanks,
Richard
On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 12:06 +, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
rejected, you missed to mention the difference of the license in help/*
Also you need to find out if
Hi *,
I uploaded a new upstream version of a package which is called CEGUI
(I did it two months ago). There is another package which depends on
CEGUI to autobuild, this package is ogre. The problem is that ogre's
version in Debian is too old and that's why it is not autobuilding
well against the
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 08:23:46PM -0400, Muammar Wadih El Khatib Rodriguez
wrote:
I uploaded a new upstream version of a package which is called CEGUI
(I did it two months ago). There is another package which depends on
CEGUI to autobuild, this package is ogre. The problem is that ogre's
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 10:41:25PM +0300, Thierry Randrianiriana wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.6.18-1
of my package smarty.
Found one yet? If not I'll do this and the -doc
- Craig
--
Craig Small GnuPG:1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5
On 3/15/07, Craig Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 10:41:25PM +0300, Thierry Randrianiriana wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.6.18-1
of my package smarty.
Found one yet? If not I'll do this and the -doc
not yet ,
thanks!
- Craig
--
Craig Small
27 matches
Mail list logo
