RFS: l7-filter-userspace

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package l7-filter-userspace. * Package name: l7-filter-userspace Version : 0.11-1 Upstream Author : Ethan Sommer, Matthew Strait * URL : http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPLv2+ Section :

Re: RFS: katimon

Hello, On Friday 17 April 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote: On 2009-04-17, Stefanos Harhalakis v...@v13.gr wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package katimon. * Package name: katimon Version : 1.0.2-2 Upstream Author : me * URL :

Re: Re: RFS: grub-choose-default (updated package)

Hi Vincent, sorry for replying that late. I fixed the issue in the latest version on mentors.d.net. Thanks, signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: RFS: kio-ftps (updated package)

Le jeudi 16 avril 2009 à 03:33, Paul Wise a écrit : 2009/4/16 Laurent Léonard laur...@open-minds.org: So .dfsg is a bad suffix ? And +dfsg should be used in priority ? If 1.2+dfsg/1.2-dfsg/1.2dfsg sort before 1.2.1 why are there different suffixes ? I don't find clear informations about

Questions about the changelog file

Hi, Is there a standard or a recommendation for the content of the changelog file ? - Is it better to specify the modified file or not ? For example if I add a build dependency, should I specify I added it to debian/control ? - Is it better to specify the file concerned by the change at the

Re: Questions about the changelog file

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 18:42:52 +0200 Laurent Léonard laur...@open-minds.org wrote: Hi, Is there a standard or a recommendation for the content of the changelog file ? As long as you don't break things like parsechangelog and you do use tools like debchange to make it easy to retain the

Re: Questions about the changelog file

On Fr, 17 Apr 2009, Laurent Léonard wrote: Is there a standard or a recommendation for the content of the changelog file ? Hmm, I guess it is up to you but it should be informative for developers, and it should be clear. Taking some examples: - Is it better to specify the modified file or

RFS: ripit (updated package)

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.7.0~beta20090329-1 of my package ripit. It builds these binary packages: ripit - Textbased audio cd ripper The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 490082, 501925, 517561, 518720 The package

RFS: magicfilter (QA update of the package) (fwd)

Please, could anybody sponsor this package for me? I sent this about two weeks ago, but it didn't get any response. Oh, just one thing: this packaging is supposed to be as disruptive as possible, with more to come, one I became the actual maintainer of this (already agreed with David Frey).

Re: RFS: wbar (4th try)

Hi Krzysztof, On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 21:16, krzysz...@burghardt.pl wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package wbar. I looked at your package and I found something to fix: - no need for 'a ' in the short description - long descriptions is a little too short maybe?

Re: RFS: kio-ftps (updated package)

2009/4/18 Laurent Léonard laur...@open-minds.org: Correct me if I'm wrong, but the licensing problem only concerns 1 documentation file in the package, other ones are under GPL-2+, so I think dfsg versioning isn't needed... The upstream tarball isn't fully DFSG-free so we remove the bad bits,

Re: Questions about the changelog file

2009/4/18 Laurent Léonard laur...@open-minds.org: Is there a standard or a recommendation for the content of the changelog file ? You'll find all of Debian's policies and best practices WRT debian/changelog in debian-policy and developers-reference. http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/