Bug#866781: marked as done (RFS: weresync/1.0.2-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Tue, 04 Jul 2017 04:20:15 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: weresync/1.0.2-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #866781, regarding RFS: weresync/1.0.2-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Re: Preferred source: a fundamental question was Re: - #859130 ITP: lina

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > This is of course in the spirit of open source, and it is the > "preferred source of modification" for the *target* audience. "Preferred" in "preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" does not refer to downstream

Re: copyright for debian/* files, collab-maint access

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 10:05:57PM +0200, Lukas Schwaighofer wrote: > I declared my ITA gmrun and I have two questions: > > 1. The current debian/copyright is written in a way that it does not >apply to the debian/* files. So, as far as I can tell, the previous >maintainers have not

Bug#867122: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.3.1-3

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "budgie-desktop" * Package name: budgie-desktop Version : 10.3.1-3 Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : [fill in URL of upstreams

copyright for debian/* files, collab-maint access

Hi mentors, I declared my ITA gmrun and I have two questions: 1. The current debian/copyright is written in a way that it does not apply to the debian/* files. So, as far as I can tell, the previous maintainers have not stated under which license they make their work available. Should

Re: Preferred source: a fundamental question was Re: - #859130 ITP: lina

Albert van der Horst wrote: > For those not versant with assembler. The binary that is generated is > supposed to be byte for byte the same with both assemblers. If not it > is a bug. The sources are equivalent, the binaries are the same, it > really is the same

Bug#867055: RFS/ITP: node-locate-character/2.0.1-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-locate-character" * Package name: node-locate-character Version : 2.0.1-1 Upstream Author : Rich Harris * URL :

Bug#867051: RFS/ITP: node-is-reference/1.0.0-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-is-reference" * Package name: node-is-reference Version : 1.0.0-1 Upstream Author : Rich Harris * URL : https://github.com/Rich-Harris/is-reference

Bug#866781: RFS: weresync/1.0-1

Dear Mentors, As I was learning the Debian packaging system, I found I had made a few mistakes (along with changes for other distributions), resulting in me updating the package, so I have updated the package. You can now download the package with: dget -x

Bug#867012: RFS: ipython-genutils/0.2.0-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ipython-genutils" * Package name: ipython-genutils Version : 0.2.0-1 Upstream Author : IPython Development Team * URL :

Preferred source: a fundamental question was Re: - #859130 ITP: lina

Gianfranco Costamagna schreef op 2017-06-29 20:32: we want everything built from the "preferred source of modification". So, if you develop your tool by changing assembly code this is completely fine. I do, but there is hitch. Imagine a Russian scientist with an important FORTRAN package

Bug#867009: RFS: fzf/0.16.8-2 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "fzf" * Package name: fzf Version : 0.16.8-2 Upstream Author : junegun...@gmail.com * URL : https://github.com/junegunn/fzf * License : Expat Section