Hi,
Since RFS bug reports via sponsorship-requests pseudo-package is widely used
now, is not it the good idea to disable feature Comments on package pages?
If not, then could you fix notifications about new comments? They are not sent
to email now. [1]
Best wishes,
Boris
[1] I faced with it
I think the public discussion is preferable.
2013-01-15, 14:44, Robert J. Clay wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Boris Pek tehnic...@yandex.ru wrote:
Since RFS bug reports via sponsorship-requests pseudo-package is widely used
now, is not it the good idea to disable feature Comments
Sorry for the hijack of your RFS, I'm testing our new mail filter.
Please ignore me :)
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ok :)
2013/1/15 Arno Töll a...@debian.org
Sorry for the hijack of your RFS, I'm testing our new mail filter.
Please ignore me :)
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
Hello,
now that our BTS driven sponsorship request tracking seems to be widely
adopted and used, we finally finished the final step. Most of us seemed
to like and prefer the BTS driven approach, but we found the control
traffic useless and noisy for a discussion list.
Hence we originally tried
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Arno Töll a...@debian.org wrote:
Sorry for the hijack of your RFS, I'm testing our new mail filter.
Please ignore me :)
(don't tell me what to do)
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
--
:wq
--
Hi
On 15.01.2013 11:20, Boris Pek wrote:
Since RFS bug reports via sponsorship-requests pseudo-package is widely used
now, is not it the good idea to disable feature Comments on package pages?
this was discussed already. In the long term we are trying to make the
difference between a bug
This means: You do not need to subscribe to a new list if you are a
debian-mentors reader, all relevant (human contributed) content will be
forwarded to that list, but the complete noise^W^W^W^W^Winformation is
available through package-sponsorship-requests@l.d.o only. If you prefer
to get
I should also note a review for this package was sent off-report :)
Cheers,
T
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Arno Töll a...@debian.org wrote:
Sorry for the hijack of your RFS, I'm testing our new mail filter.
just curious, I'm not related to this RFS, should I still receive this
message?
2013/1/15 Arno Töll a...@debian.org
Sorry for the hijack of your RFS, I'm testing our new mail filter.
Please ignore me :)
--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID:
The message has been sent to debian-mentors, so if you're subscribed to
the list that is probably why you are getting the e-mails like I am.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 02:18:48PM -0200, Carlos Jordão wrote:
just curious, I'm not related to this RFS, should I still receive this
message?
Your message dated Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:20:28 +
with message-id e1tv9fu-00043w...@quantz.debian.org
and subject line closing RFS: fonts-pecita/3.4-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #686023,
regarding RFS: fonts-pecita/3.4-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Your message dated Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:20:29 +
with message-id e1tv9fv-00044h...@quantz.debian.org
and subject line closing RFS: fractgen/2.0.14-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #670452,
regarding RFS: fractgen/2.0.14-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:20:28 +
with message-id e1tv9fu-000447...@quantz.debian.org
and subject line closing RFS: fcgi-daemon/0.2021-1 [ITP] -- Perl-aware
FastCGI daemon
has caused the Debian Bug report #660175,
regarding RFS: fcgi-daemon/0.2021-1 [ITP] -- Perl-aware
Hi,
Neither my AM (Christian Perrier) nor myself are sure about the answer to this
one, so he suggested I ask -devel for advice (and I'm throwing -mentors into
the mix too).
I've prepared an update for calibre, to fix a few issues in the package which
is currently in Wheezy (see #686547 for
* Giulio Paci giuliop...@gmail.com, 2013-01-14, 01:47:
Typo (in many files): reverved - reserved.
Fixed.
Would you mind filing a bug against tclap, too? (Either upstream or in
the Debian BTS.)
I think these options should be enabled only if
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noopt is not set:
* Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org, 2013-01-15, 23:27:
The version of calibre in Wheezy is 0.8.51+dfsg-1; what should the
update's version be? I'm purposefully not mentioning our ideas (one of
them is obvious from the exchanges in the bug report, but is in all
likelihood incorrect).
I would paint
Il 15/01/2013 23:28, Jakub Wilk ha scritto:
* Giulio Paci giuliop...@gmail.com, 2013-01-14, 01:47:
Typo (in many files): reverved - reserved.
Fixed.
Would you mind filing a bug against tclap, too? (Either upstream or in the
Debian BTS.)
Done upstream.
I think these options should be
Your message dated Wed, 16 Jan 2013 04:20:24 +
with message-id e1tvkuc-iy...@quantz.debian.org
and subject line closing RFS: supertransball2/1.5-5 [ITA] -- Thrust type of game
has caused the Debian Bug report #693565,
regarding RFS: supertransball2/1.5-5 [ITA] -- Thrust type of game
to be
Quoting Jakub Wilk (jw...@debian.org):
* Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org, 2013-01-15, 23:27:
The version of calibre in Wheezy is 0.8.51+dfsg-1; what should the
update's version be? I'm purposefully not mentioning our ideas
(one of them is obvious from the exchanges in the bug report, but
is in all
20 matches
Mail list logo
