Re: postfix as default-mta? [Re: Bug#508644: new release goal default-mta?]

Hi, Christian Surchi wrote: > ssmpt is not able to handle a queue, so I imagine that it needs > necessarily a permanent connection with a smarthost... am I wrong? No, you're right. > I don't like this one for *any* machine. I wouldn't like this as the default debian setup. Risking losing mail

Re: Bug#511640: ITP: gbirthday -- GBirthday is a birthday reminder application that helps you to remember your evolution contacts' birthdays.

Hi, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Rolf Leggewie (13/01/2009): > > Package: wnpp > > Severity: wishlist > > Owner: Rolf Leggewie > > > > * Package name: gbirthday > > Version : 0.4.1 > > Upstream Author : Alex Mallo > > * URL : http://gbirthday.sf.net/ > > * License

Re: screenshots.debian.net goes beta

Hi, Christoph Haas wrote: > On Montag, 10. November 2008, Jon Dowland wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 03:05:32PM +0100, Christoph Haas wrote: > > > Have fun and let me know what you think. > > > > Thank you for this; it looks very nice! +1 > > * what does the search field operate on? A sear

Re: Bug#489132: Still relevant?

Hi, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008, Sven Joachim wrote: > > Is it still correct that dpkg needs to be upgraded first before doing a > > dist-upgrade from Etch? With perl-base 5.10.0-14 pre-depending on a > > fixed version of dpkg, that should not be the case anymore, AFAICS. > > I

Re: Handling of removed packages

Hi, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Wolf Wiegand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Maybe it should be mandatory to always have a transition package for > > packages which are being removed from the archives? For example, when > > package X_0.1 is to be remove

Re: Handling of removed packages

Hi, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > For some time now, I have been thinking about the problem of packages > which are removed from the archive at some point, without an (enforced) > transition to a new package name. Users of such packages keep them > around, usually never noticing the fact that n

Re: Bug#466669: ITP: squirrelmail-gpg -- GnuPG plugin for SquirrelMail

Hi, Don Armstrong wrote: > [...] > so I'd strongly suggest that this package have the key-uploading and > other secret-key requiring bits disabled by default, > [...] afaik horde/imp4 supports uploading of gpg-keys as well. How does this package handle this issue? Cheers, Wolf -- "Plug and P

Re: xv and xorg

Hi, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Jiri Klouda wrote, Thursday, October 05, 2006 6:57 AM > [...] > > I just wanted to ask when xv is going to be updated or what is > > holding it up or if someone has some suggestion how I could > > upgrade and still get it working (some experimental xv package?) > > or