Bug#877282: marked as done (RFS: libhinawa/0.8.2-1)

Your message dated Sat, 30 Sep 2017 04:56:12 +0200 with message-id <20170930025612.3segyrvkw3zgl...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#877282: RFS: libhinawa/0.8.2-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #877282, regarding RFS: libhinawa/0.8.2-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#877282: RFS: libhinawa/0.8.2-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libhinawa" for experimental. * Package name: libhinawa Version : 0.8.2-1 Upstream Author : Takashi Sakamoto * URL :

Bug#877196: RFS: nfft/3.4.0~rc2-1 [experimental]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the following package: * Package name: nfft Version : 3.4.0~rc2-1 Upstream Author : Prof. Dr. Daniel Potts * URL :

Bug#877185: RFS: libinih/40-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libinih" * Package name: libinih Version : 40-1 Upstream Author : Ben Hoyt * URL : https://github.com/benhoyt/inih * License : BSD Section

Bug#864713: Bug #864713: cod-tools package is ready

Dear maintainers, I have prepared the Debian package for cod-tools in its package repository of Debian Science (https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-science/packages/cod-tools.git/) and I am looking for a sponsor. I think the package is suitable for DebianScience/Chemistry metapackage.

Re: Doubt about using a forked version for a new package release

Hello Nelson, >Debian has pngnq at version 1.0 with the latest upstream version at 1.1 >The fork https://sf.net/projects/pngnqs9 is at version 2.0.2 > >The best option seems, indeed, to offer the forked version (as >https://bugs.debian.org/862077 also says) usually a good starting point is to

Bug#877047: RFS: sane-backends-extras/1.0.22.5 [QA]

On Friday, 29 September 2017 5:37 AM, Herbert Fortes wrote: > Uploaded. Thanks for you time. Thank you, Herbert. Kind regards, Hugh