Bug#864988: marked as done (RFS: pidgin-sipe/1.22.1-1 -- Pidgin plugin for MS Office Communicator and MS Lync)

Your message dated Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:12:40 + (UTC) with message-id <1885408982.1178184.1497791560...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#864988: RFS: pidgin-sipe/1.22.1-1 -- Pidgin plugin for MS Office Communicator and MS Lync has caused the Debian Bug report #864988, regarding RFS:

Bug#864988: RFS: pidgin-sipe/1.22.1-1 -- Pidgin plugin for MS Office Communicator and MS Lync

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for package "pidgin-sipe", whose source code is at: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/pidgin-sipe.git or you may also: dget -x

Bug#864944: RFS: zimg/2.5.1-1 [ITP]

Changed package name from z.lib to zimg. Sanjeev On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:20:54 +0100 Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > Yes, drop z.lib in favor or zimg. > > Besides, users would typically discover the library via pkg-config > with the `zimg` keyword or use it with the link flag

Re: Bug#864944: RFS: zimg/2.5.1-1 [ITP]

Changed package from z.lib to zimg. Sanjeev On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:20:54 +0100 Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > Yes, drop z.lib in favor or zimg. > > Besides, users would typically discover the library via pkg-config > with the `zimg` keyword or use it with the link flag

Bug#852935: marked as done (RFS: gnome-shell-extension-dash-to-panel/3-1 ITP: 852164 -- combines the dash and the GNOME main panel into a single panel)

Your message dated Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:20:16 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: gnome-shell-extension-dash-to-panel/3-1 ITP: 852164 -- combines the dash and the GNOME main panel into a single panel has caused the Debian Bug report #852935,

Bug#863278: RFS: usbguard/0.7.0-1

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 07:43:35PM +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote: Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usbguard" d/copyright - please set the years to include 2016, 2017. there are some files owned by RH which are copyright

Re: Bug#864944: RFS: zimg/2.5.1-1 [ITP]

yes, it can be confusing since the package name is just 'z' library and '.' emphasis the space z and lib. should i revert it back it zimg? this package closes https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=864888 looks like i forget to mention in request template,but added it in

Re: Bug#864944: RFS: zimg/2.5.1-1 [ITP]

Yes, drop z.lib in favor or zimg. Besides, users would typically discover the library via pkg-config with the `zimg` keyword or use it with the link flag -lzimg. Based on that, it sounds to me that the canonical name for the library should be (lib)zimg, not z.lib. Naming is hard. Ghis On Sun,

Re: Bug#864944: RFS: zimg/2.5.1-1 [ITP]

On Sun, 2017-06-18 at 00:54 +0530, Sanjeev wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "zimg" > > * Package name: zimg > Version : 2.5.1-1 > Upstream Author : sekrit-twc > * URL :

Bug#864961: marked as done (RFS: groonga-normalizer-mysql/1.1.1-3)

Your message dated Sun, 18 Jun 2017 07:22:14 + (UTC) with message-id <591003501.917849.1497770534...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#864961: RFS: groonga-normalizer-mysql/1.1.1-3 has caused the Debian Bug report #864961, regarding RFS: groonga-normalizer-mysql/1.1.1-3 to be marked as

Bug#864962: marked as done (RFS: groonga/7.0.3-2)

Your message dated Sun, 18 Jun 2017 07:20:06 + (UTC) with message-id <147531535.918050.1497770406...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#864962: RFS: groonga/7.0.3-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #864962, regarding RFS: groonga/7.0.3-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Re: experimental => unstable?

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Roger Shimizu wrote: > So it should be fine to release various packages currently being held > in experimental to unstable. Unstable is back in business, but testing is still frozen. Please note you still need to co-ordinate with the release team for

Re: experimental => unstable?

Roger Shimizu writes: > Stretch is just released [0], Yeah~! > We're having a release party in Tokyo [1]. Yay \o/ > [0] https://www.debian.org/News/2017/20170617 > [1] https://wiki.debian.org/ReleasePartyStretch/Japan/Tokyo > > So it should be fine to release various

experimental => unstable?

Dear mentors list, Stretch is just released [0], Yeah~! We're having a release party in Tokyo [1]. [0] https://www.debian.org/News/2017/20170617 [1] https://wiki.debian.org/ReleasePartyStretch/Japan/Tokyo So it should be fine to release various packages currently being held in experimental