Dear Mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.99.2-1
of my package libitpp.
It builds these binary packages:
libitpp-dev - C++ library for signal processing and communication
libitpp6 - C++ library for signal processing and communication
The package is lintian clean.
The
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 13:51:33 +0530
Kumar Appaiah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.99.2-1
of my package libitpp.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/libi/libitpp.html
When asking for a sponsor, please mention whether the package already
exists in Debian - i.e.
Neil Williams codehelp at debian.org writes:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.99.2-1
of my package libitpp.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/libi/libitpp.html
When asking for a sponsor, please mention whether the package already
exists in Debian - i.e. whether you have had
From: Charlie Smotherman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
Subject: RFS: ampache
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package ampache.
* Package name: ampache
Version : 3.3.3.2-1
Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream]
* URL
Ok let's try this one more time
From: Charlie Smotherman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
Subject: RFS: ampache
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package ampache.
* Package name: ampache
Version : 3.3.3.2-1
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
I used to create one package with using the -vversion dpkg-buildpackage
option. Now my sponsor uses sbuild. How can the -vversion option be
passed to sbuild? I personally don't use sbuild, but took a quick look
into the manpage, but didn't find anything. Or are there any
workarounds?
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.7~svn-r227-1
of my package powertop.
It builds these binary packages:
powertop - linux tool to find out what is using power on a laptop
The package is lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 427345, 427548, 429305,
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 05:21:03PM +0200, Krzysztof Burghardt wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.7~svn-r227-1
of my package powertop.
Sponsored! Is there a reason you took the SVN version instead of 1.7
stable?
Funny though that uscan found out there is a 1.17 version
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.41+0.4.2-4
of my package secpanel.
It builds these binary packages:
secpanel - A graphical user interface for SSH and SCP
The upload would fix these bugs: 317063
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL:
Hi,
* Denis V. Sirotkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 16:25]:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package fortunes-ru.
I will sponsor this package. Just a few notes:
You use the Homepage tag in control but you just indent with·
one space, please use 2 as described in 6.2.4 developers·
reference.
Hi,
I saw many packages using the template from
mentors.debian.net which then always says:
The package is lintian clean.
And I saw many packages which are not lintian clean but
state otherwise which really sucks. Can you change this
string to something like:
Please check your package for the
Hi Bruno,
On Sunday 1 July 2007 18:01, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.41+0.4.2-4
of my package secpanel.
Thanks for your effort to adopt an orphaned package.
I've taken a look and have the following points:
- Why the strange version
On Sunday 1 July 2007 18:12, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Otherwise it looks fine.
One more thing: there's some bugs open against the package, including a
wishlist bug regarding a new upstream version. Perhaps you want to take a
look at those to see whether you can address them?
Thijs
Hi Charlie,
On Sunday 1 July 2007 12:43, Charlie wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package ampache.
I've taken a look and have found the following remarks.
* You install under /usr/share/ampache. The webapps
policy (still draft, but not quite controversial) recommends
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:11:00PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
I saw many packages using the template from
mentors.debian.net which then always says:
The package is lintian clean.
And I saw many packages which are not lintian clean but
state otherwise which really sucks. Can you change this
Hi,
* Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 19:13]:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:11:00PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
I saw many packages using the template from
mentors.debian.net which then always says:
The package is lintian clean.
And I saw many packages which are not lintian
On Sunday 01 July 2007 18:12, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Hi Bruno,
On Sunday 1 July 2007 18:01, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.41+0.4.2-4
of my package secpanel.
Thanks for your effort to adopt an orphaned package.
I meet few Debian
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 17:57:50 +0200
Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny though that uscan found out there is a 1.17 version online
although the web site says 1.7 is the most current version.
When I browse to:
http://www.linuxpowertop.org/download/
there actually is a version
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:01:39 +0200
Bruno Costacurta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.41+0.4.2-4
of my package secpanel.
Small typo in debian/control: managining
--
bye
ranf
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Thierry Randrianiriana schrieb:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package gimmie.
* Package name: gimmie
Version : 0.2.7-1
Upstream Authors:
Alex Graveley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Trowbridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 09:58:52 + (UTC)
Kumar Appaiah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Williams codehelp at debian.org writes:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.99.2-1
of my package libitpp.
When asking for a sponsor, please mention whether the package already
exists in
2007/7/1, Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sponsored! Is there a reason you took the SVN version instead of 1.7
stable?
Just because it have been translated to Polish (in opposite to pure 1.7).
Thanks for upload.
Regards,
--
Krzysztof Burghardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.burghardt.pl/
--
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi,
* Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 19:13]:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:11:00PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
I saw many packages using the template from
mentors.debian.net which then always says:
The package is
I'd like to ask if the template could advise/require that certain extra
fields are always specified?
1. An ITP usually includes a Language: C/C++/Python/Perl etc. line, so
for requests for sponsors, it would be good to carry this over so that
packages that already exist in the archive also carry
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 08:37:33PM +, Joseph Nahmias wrote:
Can you please give more information about what ntfs-config actually
does. Also, the URL above does not respond...
Here is where the first RFS thread started:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/06/msg00055.html
Hi,
* Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 20:29]:
I'd like to ask if the template could advise/require that certain extra
fields are always specified?
1. An ITP usually includes a Language: C/C++/Python/Perl etc. line, so
for requests for sponsors, it would be good to carry this over
On 01/07/07, Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi,
* Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 19:13]:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:11:00PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
I saw many packages using the template from
Hi,
* Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 21:41]:
On 01/07/07, Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
[...]
Lintian is now v1.23.31 instead of v1.23.28 (Etch). Hope that
helps.
Is lintian only checking the .deb file
Hi,
On 01/07/07, Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
* Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 21:41]:
On 01/07/07, Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
[...]
Lintian is now v1.23.31 instead of v1.23.28 (Etch). Hope
Hi,
* Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 21:51]:
[...]
By the way, what do you think about making linda check the
package too?
Linda itself is too buggy I think. Linda is not bad but when
looking at the past I came to a point where I stopped using
it because of its bugs.
I
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:54:35 +0200
Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. An ITP usually includes a Language: C/C++/Python/Perl etc.
line, so for requests for sponsors, it would be good to carry this
over so that packages that already exist in the archive also carry
this information in the
Hi,
On 01/07/07, Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
* Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 21:51]:
[...]
By the way, what do you think about making linda check the
package too?
Linda itself is too buggy I think. Linda is not bad but when
looking at the past I came to a
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package command-not-found.
* Package name: command-not-found
Version : 0.2.4+debian-1
Upstream Author : Zygmunt Krynicki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Vogt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:39:10PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
On 01/07/07, Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
Hi,
* Christoph Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 19:13]:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 06:11:00PM +0200, Nico
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 10:08:47PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package command-not-found.
* Package name: command-not-found
Version : 0.2.4+debian-1
Upstream Author : Zygmunt Krynicki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.20070627
of my package app-install-data (I took it over from the previous maintainer,
with permission).
It builds these binary packages:
app-install-data - Application Installer Data Files
The package appears to be lintian clean.
Christoph Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 10:08:47PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package command-not-found.
* Package name: command-not-found
Version : 0.2.4+debian-1
Upstream Author : Zygmunt Krynicki [EMAIL
Dear mentors,
I am looking for the new version 0.55+svn256-1 of the package syck which is
already in Debian, maintained by Robert Jordens [EMAIL PROTECTED]. jordens
doesn't use it any more and has given me permission to take it. (He isn't
responding to my mail - might be on vacation)
*
On Sunday 01 July 2007 18:15, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Sunday 1 July 2007 18:12, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Otherwise it looks fine.
One more thing: there's some bugs open against the package, including a
wishlist bug regarding a new upstream version. Perhaps you want to take a
look at those
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 15:05:54 -0500
Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an alias in my .bashrc which helps me with this stuff:
alias checkdeb='linda -i *.deb; linda -i *.dsc; lintian -i -I
*.deb;
lintian -i -I *.dsc'
What's wrong with just passing the .changes? That
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 10:08:47PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package command-not-found.
* Package name: command-not-found
Version : 0.2.4+debian-1
Upstream Author : Zygmunt Krynicki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Minor and wishlist bugs still count - particularly for things like linda
and lintian, which leads to 16 outstanding. (The lintian maintainer
correctly insists that lintian - and therefore linda - are only
indicators of problems and cannot catch all such
2007/7/1, Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
* Denis V. Sirotkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-01 16:25]:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package fortunes-ru.
I will sponsor this package. Just a few notes:
You use the Homepage tag in control but you just indent with·
one space, please use 2 as
On 6/28/07, Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using a datestamp because that seems to be the best way to handle
the 'version' of the icons pack.
To prevent the need for an epoch if upstream decides to use versions,
you might want to go with something like 0.0.20070625-1 or
44 matches
Mail list logo
