, I fail to see what can reasonably be
done except letting pantomime1.2 and lusernet.app be auto-removed
(which will be the case in 13 days unless something else happens in
the meantime) :/ ... except if the release team decides to flag this
RC bug jessie-ignore.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
: in this case, you want to retitle the bug, so it's clear what
you are asking. I did it this time, so you can see how it's done :)
Intrigeri are you going to have a look or would you prefer if I did?
I certainly wouldn't mind if you gave me a hand on that one. Note that
I usually also act
Silvio Rhatto wrote (17 Apr 2014 21:24:29 GMT) :
I also got swamped with work and it's still hard to find when I should
ask for a new release to be uploaded into Debian.
I suggest just closing this RFS bug, then.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org
Hi Gaudenz, rhatto, and others,
Gaudenz Steinlin wrote (17 Apr 2014 06:30:09 GMT) :
Any update on this? I'm currently evaluating keyringer for my use and
would like to test the latest release. If intrigeri is just busy I can
also help with sponsoring the package (only after easter though).
I
Hi,
Silvio Rhatto wrote (22 Mar 2014 19:53:54 GMT) :
I just released 0.3.3 with fixed suggested in this thread.
Looks good to me, feel free to retitle and reuse this RFS.
Note that your branches don't seem to have been pushed to Git yet,
while the tags have been.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
Hi,
Silvio Rhatto wrote (18 Mar 2014 00:17:11 GMT) :
Em Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:29:12AM +0100, intrigeri escreveu:
Great! Here's a quick code review of the changes since 0.2.9.
Thanks for the review :)
You're welcome. In the future, how about releasing a RC, issueing
a call for reviews
for key ID
$recipient:
I'm afraid GPG signature hash is unclear to most people.
Just say OpenPGP fingerprint instead?
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
-description-contains-empty-paragraph
W: bilibop-common: extended-description-contains-empty-paragraph
W: bilibop-udev: extended-description-contains-empty-paragraph
Looks like some buggy variable substitution.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri
Hi,
intrigeri wrote (04 Jul 2013 06:49:08 GMT) :
I plan to review, and hopefully upload bilibop next week.
Here we go.
First, was the target distribution change in debian/changelog
intentional? (0.4.12 has experimental, 0.4.13 has unstable.)
Second, it looks like important changes
the lintian warning.
A Lintian override would be less hackish, and would express the intent
a bit more clearly, wouldn't it?
Cheers!
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
Vasudev Kamath wrote (15 Oct 2012 17:38:41 GMT) :
On 19:08 Mon 15 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
I think you should read the documentation about -s ours,
before concluding you can't merge it back to master.
Tried that but what here happens is wheezy branch is based on master
which doesn't have
that repository no more exists! I don't know what
happened but I guess either domain moved or something else happened.
Have you tried asking the previous maintainer to provide you with
their old repository's history?
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org
, given previous maintainer had his own repository in his own
domain, importing their history, merged with ours strategy, may be
an option too.
Cheers!
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org
Hi,
So, my question about Git is: should I start it from the initial
release, or from the actual one ?
When using a git-buildpackage workflow,
git-import-dsc makes it trivial to import the full history,
especially for a native package such as yours.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key
Hi,
quid...@poivron.org wrote (16 Jun 2012 00:52:22 GMT) :
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/bilibop/bilibop_0.3.0.dsc
Hopefully, I'll review this before the end of the month.
Other potential sponsors: if you can be faster than me, please do.
So, I don't understand the
quid...@poivron.org wrote (08 Jun 2012 22:35:21 GMT) :
OK. But packaging is not a goal in itself, so I think I will
not send a new version with just (in the changelog):
* Fix typos, unclear sentences and language errors in
debian/control, in the documentation and in the comments
of
the
Debian revision number only. In the present case, we would move from
0.2-1 to 0.2-2, which would reflect the actual changes quite better.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri
Linux one.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Hi,
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/bilibop/bilibop_0.2.dsc
Great!
+ * New OpenPGP key.
I doubt this is relevant to debian/changelog.
+ * debian/control: change 'Achitecture: all' to 'Architecture: linux-any'
for
+all binaries.
I think you mean all binary packages,
override_dh_pysupport by hand?
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
20 matches
Mail list logo
