On 2021-06-04 at 17:43, Jon Gough wrote:
> On 9/5/21 5:40 pm, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 04:41:13PM +1000, Jon Gough wrote:
>>> I now know what path I need to follow, i.e. have a plugin manager
>>> that uses the platform installation process so that the uninstall
>>>
The Wanderer wrote:
> I genuinely do not see what insisting on uninstalling plugins at the
> same time as the main program, for all user accounts, provides as a
> benefit. The only maybe benefit I've seen suggested is cleaning up to
> free disk space, and that seems to me to be so obviously
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-click-log":
* Package name: python-click-log
Version : 0.3.2-1
Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream]
* URL :
On 5/6/21 8:36 am, Sven Hartge wrote:
The Wanderer wrote:
I genuinely do not see what insisting on uninstalling plugins at the
same time as the main program, for all user accounts, provides as a
benefit. The only maybe benefit I've seen suggested is cleaning up to
free disk space, and that
On 9/5/21 5:40 pm, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 04:41:13PM +1000, Jon Gough wrote:
My conclusion is that application plugin mangers should make use of the
platform installation process for installing and uninstalling plugins as it
"the platform installation process"
On 5/6/21 7:59 am, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2021-06-04 at 17:43, Jon Gough wrote:
On 9/5/21 5:40 pm, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 04:41:13PM +1000, Jon Gough wrote:
I now know what path I need to follow, i.e. have a plugin manager
that uses the platform installation
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dte":
* Package name: dte
Version : 1.10-1
Upstream Author : Craig Barnes
* URL : https://craigbarnes.gitlab.io/dte/
* License : GPL-2
* Vcs
Your message dated Fri, 4 Jun 2021 15:59:14 +0200
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#981794: RFS: gftools/0.5.2+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- Google
Fonts Tools
has caused the Debian Bug report #981794,
regarding RFS: gftools/0.5.2+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- Google Fonts Tools
to be marked as done.
This means
I've just sponsored an upload of gftools; it is now in NEWS.
Unfortunatly, with that package in a local repository, the font still FTBFs:
INFO:ufo2ft.postProcessor:Renaming glyphs to final production names
Post processing VFs
HOTFIX: './fonts/variable/Sono[wght].ttf': Font lacked a digital
9 matches
Mail list logo