Your message dated Sun, 23 Aug 2020 09:39:32 +0300
with message-id <20200823063932.GA6253@localhost>
and subject line Re: Bug#963199: RFS: git2cl/1:2.0 git20120920-3 -- Simple tool
to convert git logs to GNU ChangeLog format
has caused the Debian Bug report #963199,
regarding RFS: git2cl
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "git2cl"
* Package name: git2cl
Version : 1:2.0+git20120920-3
Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream]
* URL : https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects
Your message dated Thu, 20 Sep 2012 07:43:32 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: git2cl/2.0+git200808271242-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #688111,
regarding RFS: git2cl/2.0+git200808271242-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:10:31 Arno Töll wrote:
> I didn't look at your package, but at a first glimpse while looking
> through my mailbox, this came to my attention: Yesterday a new policy
> version was released, making this standards version outdated.
I thought I'd have more time to absorb policy
Hi,
On 19.09.2012 15:22, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> * Standards to 3.9.3.
I didn't look at your package, but at a first glimpse while looking
through my mailbox, this came to my attention: Yesterday a new policy
version was released, making this standards version outdated.
(resent, I wrote the wro
Hi,
On 19.09.2012 15:22, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> * Standards to 3.9.3.
I didn't look at your package, but at a first glimpse while looking
through my mailbox, this came to my attention: Yesterday a new policy
version was released, making this standards version outdated.
--
with kind regards,
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
Please consider uploading updated version of "git2cl" package.
Changelog as follows:
git2cl (2.0+git200808271242-2) unstable; urgency=low
* Added new patch to introduce POD documentation to git2cl executable:
best practice reco
Hi Paul,
No worries and many thanks for all the troubles with git2cl.
Sorry for missing the ChangeLog issue,
perhaps I was so busy so I neglected to give the required attention to
the package.
I acknowledged your changes - much appreciated.
Thank you.
Cheers,
Dmitry.
On 04/02/12 13:37, Paul
Hi Paul,
No worries and many thanks for all the troubles with git2cl.
Sorry for missing the ChangeLog issue,
perhaps I was so busy so I neglected to give the required attention to
the package.
I acknowledged your changes - much appreciated.
Thank you.
Cheers,
Dmitry.
On 04/02/12 13:37, Paul
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/git2cl/git2cl_2.0+git200808271242-1.dsc
Apologies for not getting to this sooner.
The source package you uploaded does not have a ChangeLog file in it,
IIRC you were going to add that. I took th
Hi Paul,
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:36:45 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> >
> > This wouldn't be a problem with responsive upstream.
> > I already tried to contact him but he is not answering to emails.
> > This was also confirmed by other people who tried
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> My apologies, I didn't mean to be rude for not replyng - I only noticed this
> email of yours just now. Sorry for missing it.
No probs.
> I reckon we can always talk first, before engaging the punishment actions. :)
My action was definite
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 00:27:08 Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Dmitry Smirnov , 2012-01-20, 23:49:
> >But how much time and effort one can afford in order to regenerate
> >single HTML file?
>
> Surely it wouldn't cost you more time than arguing about the issue
> takes.
Another argument is that to obey withou
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 00:27:08 Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Dmitry Smirnov , 2012-01-20, 23:49:
> >But how much time and effort one can afford in order to regenerate
> >single HTML file?
>
> Surely it wouldn't cost you more time than arguing about the issue
> takes.
True, especially if you believe it shou
* Dmitry Smirnov , 2012-01-20, 23:49:
But how much time and effort one can afford in order to regenerate
single HTML file?
Surely it wouldn't cost you more time than arguing about the issue
takes.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subj
Hi Paul,
My apologies, I didn't mean to be rude for not replyng - I only noticed this
email of yours just now. Sorry for missing it.
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:56:55 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > However you failed to clearly articulate the requiremen
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> However you failed to clearly articulate the requirements you imposed on me
> before taking action, neither were you willing to discuss the possible
> solutions.
I suppose that was unfair of me, my apologies.
How about the following compro
On Wednesday 07 December 2011 13:56:44 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > Would you please explain you decision?
>
> I think my position has been adequately explained by myself and others
> in this thread, but in short:
>
> Debian has made various promis
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Would you please explain you decision?
I think my position has been adequately explained by myself and others
in this thread, but in short:
Debian has made various promises to our users and the wider free
software community. Among them is
Hi Benoît,
I appreciate your detailed explanation.
I agree with everything you've sad regarding general terms.
All your points are valid and well-explained.
I think this discussion drifted away from particular situation.
Specifically to git2cl there are still number of questions left:
-- Is o
Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> I think while you might be right in general, in this case you're missing the
> point.
>
> First of all, I agree that binary packages should be rebuilt.
>
> But I disagree to classify upstream documentation in HTML as binary.
Not binary, but generated from a source. PDFs
On Tuesday 06 December 2011 14:54:41 Paul Wise wrote:
> I withdraw my intention to sponsor git2cl.
No worries, Paul,
I'm sincerely grateful to you for your time and help.
Thank you.
Would you please explain you decision?
Obviously you disagree with something I sad, so I would appreciate if you
I withdraw my intention to sponsor git2cl.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ekl1tqnm8tmve9ehhc
Hi Arno,
I think while you might be right in general, in this case you're missing the
point.
First of all, I agree that binary packages should be rebuilt.
But I disagree to classify upstream documentation in HTML as binary.
As we're all know, HTML is a form of source, it is very human
readab
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Dmitry,
On 03.12.2011 09:23, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> However I'm not too sure if introdicing another build-dependency worth
> regenerating single file merely to get almost the same file (but generated)
> as
> result. Not to mention the effort
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:34:42 +1100
Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> Sorry for delay.
>
I apologize back :)
> Please help me to understand the issue a bit better:
>
> The number of spaces between Name and Email - is it significant?
> As far as I can see GNU documents do not say if there
On Saturday 03 December 2011 16:52:03 Paul Wise wrote:
>
> One more thing that I missed, sorry about this :(
>
> README.html is actually generated from README. Please delete that in
> get-orig-source, build-dep on asciidoc, run asciidoc at build time to
> generate it and (optionally) send upstream
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Please upload as is.
>
> Current version number combine upstream tag and the date of upstream commit
> (which I think is not too difficult to notice) so it is immediately visible
> when upstream was active last time.
Ok.
One more thing that
On Saturday 03 December 2011 15:58:21 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > Thanks for handy advice. It may be nice to use tags for versioning,
> > but I'd like to keep translated-to-date version because it is
> > human-readable and meaningful.
> > "2.0" doesn
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Thanks for handy advice. It may be nice to use tags for versioning,
> but I'd like to keep translated-to-date version because it is human-readable
> and meaningful.
> "2.0" doesn't say much and I'm not sure what to do if minor update to upstr
On Friday 02 December 2011 23:32:58 Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Jist to warn that I've noticed a problem with latest package upload to
> mentors (recent package did not correctly replace previous one)
> which I was only able to fix by removing package and uploading it again.
>
> Because of this latest
Jist to warn that I've noticed a problem with latest package upload to mentors
(recent package did not correctly replace previous one)
which I was only able to fix by removing package and uploading it again.
Because of this latest edition was not available for download from
http://mentors.debia
On Friday 02 December 2011 19:48:27 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Please add a debian/watch file explaining that upstream does not
> > release tarballs and that the gitweb server used does not have the
> > ability to export tarballs.
>
> Actually this is b
> There is no reason to have +git200808271242 in the upstream version
> number since you are packaging a tagged version. I would suggest using
> `git describe | sed s/git2cl-//` to get a useful version number. This
> works nicely even when you are packaging a non-tagged version.
Thanks for handy a
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> Please add a debian/watch file explaining that upstream does not
> release tarballs and that the gitweb server used does not have the
> ability to export tarballs.
Actually this is better:
version=3
opts=downloadurlmangle=s/shortlog(.*)$/snapsho
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>> I would suggest to use Section: vcs instead of utils.
>
> Changed as adviced.
You appear to have missed the one in the source package section of
debian/control. Fix that one and delete the one from the binary
package section since that caus
Dear Paul,
Thank you very much for taking your time to review.
Please find updated package on the following URL:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/git2cl/git2cl_2.0+git200808271242-1.dsc
git repository is updated as well.
> > I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
> Since I u
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
Since I use this for some upstream projects, I took a look.
I would upload it, but your debian/copyright is missing 2 copyright
holders from the code copied from cvs2cl.
Some other things you
Hi Antonio,
Sorry for delay.
Please help me to understand the issue a bit better:
The number of spaces between Name and Email - is it significant?
As far as I can see GNU documents do not say if there should be one or two
spaces. (However in their example I see two spaces)
Is this important for
Hi Luca,
I'm not affiliated with upstream in any way...
I can integrate your patch for you and hopefully forward it upstream
eventually.
Regards,
Dmitry.
On 26/11/11 20:59, Luca BRUNO wrote:
> Dmitry Smirnov scrisse:
>
>> I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
>
> On a sidenote, are you
Dmitry Smirnov scrisse:
> I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
On a sidenote, are you in contact with upstream?
I've been trying to propose a patch for merging since August, tried by
merge request, mail, IRC, whatever, but got no answer so far.
If so, I'd be glad if you can proxy it for
On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 16:30:31 +1100
Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dear Mentors,
>
> I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
>
> Package name : git2cl
> URL : http://josefsson.org/git2cl/
> License : GPL-2+
> Section
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Mentors,
I'm looking for sponsor for my package git2cl
Package name: git2cl
URL : http://josefsson.org/git2cl/
License : GPL-2+
Section : utils
It is a simple tool to convert git logs to GNU ChangeLog format
acco
43 matches
Mail list logo
