Bug#884665: RFS: ooniprobe/2.2.0-1.1 [NMU]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Control: block 884370 by -1 Control: tag 884370 + pending X-Debbugs-CC: i...@debian.org, j...@debian.org Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the package “ooniprobe”: * Package name: ooniprobe Version : 2.2.0-1.1 * URL

Bug#884429: Uploaded to unstable

Control: reopen -1 Upload was rejected (something something non-existing signature file referenced in .changes); I'm just reopening this so we don't forget about it. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#884665: marked as done (RFS: ooniprobe/2.2.0-1.1 [NMU])

Your message dated Mon, 18 Dec 2017 11:18:22 + with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#884665: RFS: ooniprobe/2.2.0-1.1 [NMU] has caused the Debian Bug report #884665, regarding RFS: ooniprobe/2.2.0-1.1 [NMU] to be marked as done. This means

Bug#884697: RFS: logrotate/3.13.0-1 ITA

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "logrotate" * Package name: logrotate Version : 3.13.0-1 Upstream Author : Kamil Dudka * URL : https://github.com/logrotate/logrotate/ * License

Bug#884740: RFS: pokemmo/1.4.2-1 [ITP] -- Multiplayer online game based on the Pokemon universe

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pokemmo" * Package name: pokemmo Version : 1.4.2-1 Upstream Author : Carlos Donizete Froes * URL : https://github.com/coringao/pokemmo

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 09:54:10PM -0700, John Allwine wrote: > * Package name: stlcmd >Version : 1.0-1 > stlcmd - Suite of commands for generating, inspecting and > manipulating STL files. Alas, it fails to build: /bin/sh: 2: help2man: not found I also don't see any

Bug#883751: marked as done (RFS: deepin-calculator/1.0.1-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:58:48 +0100 with message-id <20171218205848.ux5z5o7psywdg...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#883751: RFS: deepin-calculator/1.0.1-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #883751, regarding RFS: deepin-calculator/1.0.1-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This

Bug#881199: marked as done (RFS: python-coloredlogs/7.3-1)

Your message dated Mon, 18 Dec 2017 22:25:09 +0100 with message-id <20171218212509.z7blvnrzpgz3y...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#881199: RFS: python-coloredlogs/7.3-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #881199, regarding RFS: python-coloredlogs/7.3-1 to be marked as done. This means that

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

Thanks Adam! Ack, I just introduced that help2man issue fixing the lintian warnings about man pages. Will reorganize a bit to fix that. The signing-key.asc is for uscan when checking for updates in the watch. Am I supposed to sign the orig tar ball? I left it as UNRELEASED as that was

Bug#884429: Uploaded to unstable

control: close -1 On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:31:27 +0100 Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote: > Control: reopen -1 > > Upload was rejected (something something non-existing signature file > referenced > in .changes); I'm just reopening this so we don't forget about it. I'm

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:36:00PM -0700, John Allwine wrote: > Thanks Adam! I really appreciate you taking the time to look through > this. I'm still unclear on how to include the .asc file in my upload. > The dput command takes the .changes file, which determines which files > are uploaded, so

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 04:00:53PM -0700, John Allwine wrote: > The signing-key.asc is for uscan when checking for updates in the watch. > Am I supposed to sign the orig tar ball? Well, how else can uscan verify it? It's also used to verify the orig tarball once it's in the archive. On the

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

> Well, how else can uscan verify it? > It's also used to verify the orig tarball once it's in the archive. The watch file describes how to download the upstream tar ball and its signature file. I'm not sure what to do here. Right now I do a debsign on the .changes file and it signs the .dsc file

Bug#882116: reopening RFS: sqlcl-package/0.1.0 [ITP]

As requested by Chris Lamb a justification of why the package should be native was added to the changelog, hence it needs sponsoring again to be uploaded back to the NEW queue. Thank you very much, -- Lazarus

Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP]

Maybe I'm using an old version that doesn't pick that up? Or I'm not naming it correctly? Here's the script that I run in an unbuntu docker image: https://github.com/AllwineDesigns/build_stlcmd_deb/blob/master/build_stlcmd.sh ( (If you have docker installed you can clone that repo and do a docker

Bug#884651: marked as done (RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Tue, 19 Dec 2017 02:03:22 +0100 with message-id <20171219010322.i5hea3tp5cxn5...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#884651: RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #884651, regarding RFS: stlcmd/1.0-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#884752: RFS: fcitx-skk/0.1.4-0.2 [NMU]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-ime-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org yyat...@debian.or.jp d...@debian.org Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for package "fcitx-skk" as an NMU. This NMU would move package fcitx-skk under pkg-ime team. It has been approved by

Bug#884752: [Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#884752: RFS: fcitx-skk/0.1.4-0.2 [NMU]

Please don't update for only a maintainer change, it's kinda a waste of resource. -- Regards, Aron Xu