Bug#876667: RFS: pragha/1.3.3-1

Hi, Lukas, Thanks for the new round of reviews. You're making me learn a ton. :) On 24 Sep 2017, Lukas Schwaighofer wrote: >On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:15:41 -0300 >"Gabriel F. T. Gomes" wrote: >> >> In that same message [1], you suggested the use of a version control

Bug#869806: Update

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 11:04:35PM +, Julien Hartmann wrote: > I updated the package from upstream release, which accounts for > feedback from Adam. Thanks again to him for the time he took to try it > despite not having the relevant hardware to test. > > * Compilation on non-x86 platforms

Bug#869806: Update

Hello, I updated the package from upstream release, which accounts for feedback from Adam. Thanks again to him for the time he took to try it despite not having the relevant hardware to test. * Compilation on non-x86 platforms should be fixed (tested on arm64). New version is 0.5.0-1. It can

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

Control: tags 871693 - moreinfo On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Stephen Dennis wrote: > The latest package at mentors has the version restriction removed. > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin > wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

The latest package at mentors has the version restriction removed. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:00:21PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > > > > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >= > 2.28.0. > >

Bug#876649: marked as done (RFS: qterm/1:0.7.2-1)

Your message dated Sun, 24 Sep 2017 22:07:06 +0200 with message-id <20170924200706.bemn7jntvbnkv...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#876649: RFS: qterm/1:0.7.2-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #876649, regarding RFS: qterm/1:0.7.2-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#867727: RFS: parlatype/1.5.2-1 [ITP]

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Gabor, Good work. We are nearly there! The only thing I spotted, was the lack of a docbase file to help people fire up the docs locally: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#doc-base Would you like to maintain this within the Debian

Bug#876667: RFS: pragha/1.3.3-1

Hi Gabriel, thanks for improving upon our suggestions. On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:15:41 -0300 "Gabriel F. T. Gomes" wrote: > Lukas, > In that same message [1], you suggested the use of a version control > system, but I don't know where to make it public (I know that

Re: Bug#876667: RFS: pragha/1.3.3-1

Breno, Lukas (CC) pointed out some problems [1] with the packaging of Pragha. For instance, the fact that I did not open a RFS properly. I should have sent the RFS message to sub...@bugs.debian.org, not to #592985. This is a proper RFS (I think I got it right this time). :) [1]

Bug#872652: Problems building package

On 24/09/17 11:19, Andreas Tille wrote: On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 08:39:02AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: Are you sure your cowbuilder setup is ok? This is usually not a good sign: BTW, the issue happens inside the clean target which is run *before* chrooting into cowbuilder chroot. I

Bug#876667: RFS: pragha/1.3.3-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pragha" * Package name: pragha Version : 1.3.3-1 Upstream Author : Matias De lellis * URL : https://pragha-music-player.github.io/ *

Bug#876624: marked as done (RFS: qr-tools/1.4~bzr23-1 [QA])

Your message dated Sun, 24 Sep 2017 22:03:20 +0800 with message-id <1620452.1v0gNil1JH@hosiet-tp> and subject line Re: RFS: qr-tools/1.4~bzr23-1 [QA] has caused the Debian Bug report #876624, regarding RFS: qr-tools/1.4~bzr23-1 [QA] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem

Re: Bug#876624: RFS: qr-tools/1.4~bzr23-1 [QA]

Hi Boyuan Yang, Uploaded. Thanks for your work! Regards, Herbert > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-CC: david4...@gmail.com algoz...@gmail.com > > Dear mentors, > > This is a QA upload for package "qr-tools", which might went a little bit too > far from simply

Bug#872736: RFS: dtkwidget/2.0.0-1 [ITP]

Hi czchen, Very sorry to bother you again. I just notised that I incorrectly set Maintainer's address to pkg-dee...@list.alioth.debian.org, but the real address is pkg-deepin-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org. I have corrected it and re-uploaded it to mentors.debian.net. Please re-check and upload

Bug#876649: RFS: qterm/1:0.7.2-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal X-Debbugs-CC: chinese-develop...@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear mentors and chinese-developers folks, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qterm". * Package name: qterm Version : 1:0.7.2-1 Upstream Author : Xiaoqiang Wang

Bug#872652: Problems building package

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 08:39:02AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > Are you sure your cowbuilder setup is ok? This is usually not a good sign: BTW, the issue happens inside the clean target which is run *before* chrooting into cowbuilder chroot. Kind regards Andreas. --

Bug#872652: Problems building package

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 08:39:02AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > > $ gbp-build > > gbp:info: Tarballs 'python-pymeasure_0.4.6.orig.tar.gz' not found at > > '../tarballs/' > > gbp:info: Exporting 'WC' to > >

Bug#872652: Problems building package

On 23/09/17 18:15, Andreas Tille wrote: On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 10:39:35AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: Frederic gave a hint to bug #873921. Now that the situation with pandas / statsmodels is resolved, the package builds fine [1]. [1]