Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Daniel Beyer
* Package name: silex
Version : 1.2.0
Upstream Author : Fabien Potencier
* URL : http://silex.sensiolabs.org/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: php
Description : php micro framework
Silex is a conci
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Emmanuel Bourg
* Package name: libpulse-java
Version : 2.4.7
Upstream Author : Red Hat, Inc
* URL : http://icedtea.classpath.org
* License : GPL-2 with Classpath exception
Programming Lang: Java, C
Description : P
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joao Eriberto Mota Filho
* Package name: nield
Version : 0.5.1
Upstream Author : Tetsumune KISO
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/nield
* License : GPL-2.0+
Programming Lang: C
Description : generate logs r
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roger Kalt
* Package name: elog
Version : 2.9.2+git20140511
Upstream Author : Stefan Ritt
* URL : http://midas.psi.ch/elog/
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: C
Description : Logbook system to manage notes throu
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Keng-Yu Lin"
* Package name: dogecoin
Version : 1.7.0
Upstream : Shibetoshi Nakamoto
* URL : http://dogecoin.com/
* License : MIT/X
Programming Lang: C, C++
Description : peer-to-peer network based anonymous d
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Keng-Yu Lin"
* Package name: fwts
Version : 14.05.00
Upstream Author : Firmware Testing Team (https://launchpad.net/~firmware-
testing-team)
* URL : https://launchpad.net/fwts
* License : GPLv2, LGPL,
Programming Lang:
Arto Jantunen writes:
> Because a package that doesn't work at all (and thus breaks rdeps) isn't
> as broken as a package that wipes the root fs on installation.
Note that the latter breaks the whole system, and hence is critical
regardless of this distinction.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Considering that it is really a false positive - do you think that there
> is much harm done with my stripped upload? As far as I remember a new
> EMBOSS release is on its way in the next couple of weeks and we can
> reinclude thes f
Ian Jackson writes:
> Don Armstrong writes:
>> I'm OK with either adding additional clarification or adopting this
>> language.
> I agree with Manoj's point about the gap between Russ's wording and
> the current one.
I guess I'm still failing to understand why that gap is important. Maybe
some
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Gustavo Paniagua dos Santos
* Package name: snetz
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Agus Bimantoro
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/snetz
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: Python
Description : simple live
Clint Adams writes:
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:39:39PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> Or simply add a footnote stating that two packages are NOT unrelated
>> if one depends on the other.
>
> Could someone explain why this is a useful distinction?
Because a package that doesn't work at all (
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:39:39PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Or simply add a footnote stating that two packages are NOT unrelated
> if one depends on the other.
Could someone explain why this is a useful distinction?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
Gnome / lightdm
gdm3 is installed (also re-installed) but not quite sure what is going
on as cannot switch.
root@jupiter2:~# dpkg-reconfigure lightdm
[ ok ] Reloading system message bus config...done.
ERROR: /lib/systemd/system/gdm3.service is the selected default display
manager but does not
Hi,
Ian Jackson:
> People often won't read a footnote unless they
> are tripped up by something in the main text.
>
I have to agree.
s/footnote/remark/ (in the main text), then.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsub
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬)"
* Package name: libr3-0
Version : 0~git20140520
Upstream Author : Yo-An Lin
* URL : https://github.com/c9s/r3
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: C
Description : High-performance URL router l
Hi Bastien,
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:33:18AM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> >
> > Usually releases are on July 15th. I think that we can wait for the next
> > upload, at that time or earlier, to re-introduce the manual.
>
> Could you retest with Lintian gît. I have fixed it a week ago.
I c
Andreas Tille writes ("Re: FDL with no invariant sections"):
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:35:55PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > [Andreas:]
> > > ... reintroducing a small piece of documentation which
> > > is heavily outdated (covering version 2.5 - we are now at 6.6) ...
> >
> > Do you consider t
Matthias Urlichs writes ("Re: Redefining critical bug severity (was: how to
deal with a missed so bump already uploaded ?)"):
> Ian Jackson:
> > Would adding "totally" (or "utterly") before "unrelated" help perhaps ?
>
> Or simply add a footnote stating that two packages are NOT unrelated
> if on
Hi Ian,
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:35:55PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > While this could be considered in general it is probably not worth the
> > effort to stress test mirrors and autobuilders with these huge packages
> > just for the sake of reintroducing a small piece of documentation which
>
Hi,
Ian Jackson:
> Do you consider the lack of the DFSG-free manual an RC bug ?
Given that the manual describes a version from the stone ages,
comparatively speaking, I wouldn't consider this to be an RC bug.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debia
Hi,
Ian Jackson:
> Would adding "totally" (or "utterly") before "unrelated" help perhaps ?
>
Or simply add a footnote stating that two packages are NOT unrelated
if one depends on the other.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subje
Andreas Tille writes ("Re: FDL with no invariant sections"):
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:07:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > I would reupload it as emboss_6.6.0+dfsg2-1.dsc (dfsg2), using the right
> > tar.gz (the one in 6.6.0-
Don Armstrong writes ("Re: Redefining critical bug severity (was: how to deal
with a missed so bump already uploaded ?)"):
> I'm OK with either adding additional clarification or adopting this
> language.
I agree with Manoj's point about the gap between Russ's wording and
the current one.
Would
Hi Santiago,
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:07:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> I would reupload it as emboss_6.6.0+dfsg2-1.dsc (dfsg2), using the right
> tar.gz (the one in 6.6.0-1). You don't need an epoch for that.
While this co
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Considering that it is really a false positive - do you think that there
> is much harm done with my stripped upload? As far as I remember a new
> EMBOSS release is on its way in the next couple of weeks and we can
> reinclude thes f
Le 20 mai 2014 10:27, "Charles Plessy" a écrit :
>
> Le Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> >
> > Considering that it is really a false positive - do you think that there
> > is much harm done with my stripped upload? As far as I remember a new
> > EMBOSS release is o
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Praveen Arimbrathodiyil
* Package name: ruby-nested-form
Version : 0.3.2
Upstream Author : Ryan Bates
* URL : http://github.com/ryanb/nested_form
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : conveniently
Le Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
>
> Considering that it is really a false positive - do you think that there
> is much harm done with my stripped upload? As far as I remember a new
> EMBOSS release is on its way in the next couple of weeks and we can
> reinclude
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 05:09:02PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, May 20, 2014 at 09:42:40AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> >
> > I realised that lintian is claiming:
> >
> > $ dget http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/emboss/emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
> > $ lintian emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
> >
Le Tue, May 20, 2014 at 09:42:40AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
>
> I realised that lintian is claiming:
>
> $ dget http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/emboss/emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
> $ lintian emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
> E: emboss source: license-problem-gfdl-invariants doc/manuals/admin.tex
> in
Hi
I realised that lintian is claiming:
$ dget http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/emboss/emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
$ lintian emboss_6.6.0-1.dsc
E: emboss source: license-problem-gfdl-invariants doc/manuals/admin.tex
invariant part is: url{http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html , version 1.1 or
a
31 matches
Mail list logo
