Hi,
>The changes I have quoted above are not usually appropriate for NMUs.
>In particular, changing from a version 1.0 to a 3.0 source package could
>annoy the current package maintainers a great deal.
>
>In this case, it looks like those package maintainers are inactive (no
>uploads since 2005).
Hi Sean,
>I think that we should avoid thinking that one purpose of source-only
>uploads is to deal with DDs and DMs intentionally subverting security by
>means of dodgy binaries. We already place a great deal of trust in
>those who can upload packages, and it doesn't make sense to say that,
>d
control: tags -1 pending
> control: tag -1 +confirmed
Hi Sean, thanks for the really nice review!
I did sponsor on deferred/5, because I would like to have a feedback about the
following
>+ remove build-depends on libgtk2.0-dev, libmagickcore-extra,
> autotools-dev, imagemagick.
mmm
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for a QA upload of burp.
* Package name: burp
Version : 1.4.40-2
Upstream Author : Graham Keeling
* URL : http://burp.grke.net/
* License : AGPL-3
Section : util
Your message dated Wed, 22 Jun 2016 11:54:24 +0900
with message-id <20160622025424.ga9...@artemis.silentflame.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#827700: RFS: cplay/1.50-1 [NMU]
has caused the Debian Bug report #827700,
regarding RFS: cplay/1.50-1 [NMU]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim th
My apologies, I am still getting my head around everything. It had occurred
to me not long after I uploaded but I thought it was worth a shot. I shall
get in touch with the MIA team and make it a QA upload, assuming #817410
hasn't resulted in it being removed from the archive by then
On 22 June 20
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Dear David,
Thanks for working to fix up this package.
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 09:41:02PM +0100, David Jones wrote:
> * New upstream release (Closes: #279000, #375060, #413738)
> * Converted to quilt (3.0) (Closes: #664311)
> * Updated standards version to 3.9.8
> *
Hello,
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 01:22:15PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Debian is currently moving towards source-only uploads, but at the moment
> binaries of at least one architecture are still required for NEW packages.
> This is bad, as I could have snuck some nefarious code through, be it
>
Your message dated Wed, 22 Jun 2016 00:46:34 +0200
with message-id <20160621224634.ga19...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#826769: RFS: arc-theme/20160605-1 ITP
has caused the Debian Bug report #826769,
regarding RFS: arc-theme/20160605-1 ITP
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim th
Hi Adam,
ok taking onboard the https recommendation (thanks BTW for the
clarification)- I've updated the vcs-git and upstream files accordingly.
both vcs fields point to budgie-remix debian source package.
The description field has the "A" removed to correct the warning
The new revised packag
Your message dated Wed, 22 Jun 2016 00:08:06 +0200
with message-id <20160621220806.ga17...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#826974: RFS: moka-icon-theme/5.3.2-1 ITP
has caused the Debian Bug report #826974,
regarding RFS: moka-icon-theme/5.3.2-1 ITP
to be marked as done.
This means that you cl
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:46:26PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote:
> I've corrected the Vcs fields in our budgie-remix debian source repo -
> https://github.com/budgie-remix/faba-icon-theme/tree/debian
>
> If you want me to-do another RFS/ITP happy to-do so. Alternatively when
> the upstream maintai
Thanks Adam,
I've corrected the Vcs fields in our budgie-remix debian source repo -
https://github.com/budgie-remix/faba-icon-theme/tree/debian
If you want me to-do another RFS/ITP happy to-do so. Alternatively when
the upstream maintainer releases a new version of faba-icon-theme then I'll
RF
Thanks Adam,
a new upload has been made. linitian runs now without any errors.
vcs-git and vcs-browser now points to the budgie-remix github repo where
the debian source package resides.
GPL-3 points to the debian folder location
Description of moka has been made more descriptive.
rules file
Hi Roger,
>Control: retitle -1 RFS: libcorkipset/1.1.1+20150311-1 [ITP] -- C
>library to store sets/maps of IP address
thanks for that!
>I think you didn't review since you did last time, and I did some
>changes based on some changes in previous post, so here I *rewrite*
>the previous post.
th
Your message dated Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:27:29 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: pegtl/1.3.1-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #826387,
regarding RFS: pegtl/1.3.1-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not th
> > > 2. Is there some reason you packaged version 0.6.4? 0.6.6 is
> > > available.
> >=20
> > $ git tag | grep 0.6.6
> > [empty]
> Hmm, nevermind, not sure where I thought I'd found 0.6.8.
There is Version: 0.6.6 header in elisp file in upstream master.
But there is no corresponding tag. I pack
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:38:46AM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> It appears as just amd64, when it's marked "any", but I don't know if it'll
> be compiled for other architectures or I'm just too impatient :-)
It will, you can watch the current progress, failures and logs at:
https:
Control: retitle -1 RFS: libcorkipset/1.1.1+20150311-1 [ITP] -- C
library to store sets/maps of IP address
Dear G,
I think you didn't review since you did last time, and I did some
changes based on some changes in previous post, so here I *rewrite*
the previous post.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:0
Thanks very much for your review/upload.
Geoff
Le 20/06/2016 à 14:20, Gianfranco Costamagna a écrit :
* Fixed insecure vcs-field uri
that commit was bad, missing a /git/ in path.
corrected, changed target from UNRELEASED to unstable, signed, uploaded
and committed on git.
G.
Hi Adam,
It appears as just amd64, when it's marked "any", but I don't know if it'll
be compiled for other architectures or I'm just too impatient :-)
21 matches
Mail list logo
