Bug#792200: closed by Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org (Re: Bug#792200: RFS: roxterm/3.0.2-1)

2015-08-07 Thread Vincent Cheng
Hi Tony, On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Tony Houghton h...@realh.co.uk wrote: Hi, I got emails saying that roxterm 3.0.1-1 and then 3.0.2-1 were uploaded and the RFS bugs closed (the latter on 13 July), but the latest version showing up in the archives is still 2.9.5-1. Has something gone

Bug#792200: closed by Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org (Re: Bug#792200: RFS: roxterm/3.0.2-1)

2015-08-06 Thread Tony Houghton
Hi, I got emails saying that roxterm 3.0.1-1 and then 3.0.2-1 were uploaded and the RFS bugs closed (the latter on 13 July), but the latest version showing up in the archives is still 2.9.5-1. Has something gone wrong with the upload? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Bug#792200: RFS: roxterm/3.0.2-1

2015-07-12 Thread Tony Houghton
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, By Murphy's Law (or is it Sod's Law) I found quite a serious bug in roxterm a day or two after the last release, so I've uploaded a new version which needs sponsoring. TIA. * Package name: roxterm Version : 3.0.2-1