> Elliot Murphy writes:
>
>> It's rather obnoxious to assume I didn't communicate as an individual
>> asking for assistance. When I did that, jwilk told me to add the
>> package to the list of packages in the topic waiting to be reviewed,
>> as is the standard operating procedure for the DPMT. It'
> Elliot Murphy writes:
>
>> (Sorry for top-posting, android does not allow me any other option).
>
> I wonder why people who use Android keep on doing this an apologising
> for it, instead of the far superior options:
>
> * don't use Android, and/or
> * agitate for this Android bug to be fixed.
Elliot Murphy writes:
> (Sorry for top-posting, android does not allow me any other option).
I wonder why people who use Android keep on doing this an apologising
for it, instead of the far superior options:
* don't use Android, and/or
* agitate for this Android bug to be fixed.
--
\
Thanks for that pointer. I have a couple packages that I need to convert
which were already published in other archives, so this is very handy.
(Sorry for top-posting, android does not allow me any other option).
--
Elliot Murphy | https://launchad.net/~statik/
On Jan 28, 2010 6:48 PM, "Ben Finn
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> I would think a separate task tracker would be more appropriate; the
> channel topic should remain primarily descriptive of the topic of the
> channel, after all.
I'd strongly suggest the use of PET (package entropy tracker) written
by the Pe
Elliot Murphy writes:
> It's rather obnoxious to assume I didn't communicate as an individual
> asking for assistance. When I did that, jwilk told me to add the
> package to the list of packages in the topic waiting to be reviewed,
> as is the standard operating procedure for the DPMT. It's also
Tristan Seligmann writes:
> Are you even in the channel?
Often, yes.
> The topic of the channel seems like a perfectly reasonable place for
> this kind of list, too, so I'm not sure why you object to it so
> strongly.
I would think a separate task tracker would be more appropriate; the
channel
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.5.0+dfsg-1
of my package "foolscap".
It builds these binary packages:
python-foolscap - object-capability-based RPC system for Twisted Python
The upload would fix these bugs: 567145
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
-
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Elliot Murphy writes:
>
>> I've added foolscap to the /topic in #debian-python
>
> That strikes me as a rather obnoxious thing to do. Why change the topic
> for the whole channel, rather than just communicating as an individual
> asking for ass
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> That strikes me as a rather obnoxious thing to do. Why change the topic
> for the whole channel, rather than just communicating as an individual
> asking for assistance?
It's rather obnoxious to assume I didn't communicate as an individual
aski
Elliot Murphy writes:
> I've added foolscap to the /topic in #debian-python
That strikes me as a rather obnoxious thing to do. Why change the topic
for the whole channel, rather than just communicating as an individual
asking for assistance?
> but I didn't know where to say about the testing th
Elliot Murphy writes:
> Today I have switched python-whisper to use python-support instead of
> python-central
[…]
Be aware that, for an package that was *already* in Debian, you would
need to modify your maintainer scripts to clean up after the mess left
by ‘python-central’ in previous versions
Hi!
Zooko (the upstream developer) filed #567145 asking for
python-foolscap to be updated to the new 0.5.0 release.
I have committed a new changelog entry for this, test built and
installed a package using svn-buildpackage after running
get-orig-source to obtain a correctly modified tarball, and
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Elliot Murphy wrote:
> Dear mentors and python-module-packagers,
>
> I joined the team recently, injected my package into svn, and have now
> uploaded it to mentors. The package looks lintian-clean, and my test
> installations have worked OK. I'll gladly fix anythin
Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 28.01.2010 12:50, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Scott Kitterman (17/12/2009):
>>> I believe that we are getting close to uploading Python 2.6 to
>>> Unstable and dropping Python 2.4 as a supported Python version. If
>>> we finish preparations in the next week, are there any
On 28.01.2010 12:50, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Scott Kitterman (17/12/2009):
I believe that we are getting close to uploading Python 2.6 to
Unstable and dropping Python 2.4 as a supported Python version. If
we finish preparations in the next week, are there any ongoing
transitions a python2.6/pyt
> Scott Kitterman (17/12/2009):
>> I believe that we are getting close to uploading Python 2.6 to
>> Unstable and dropping Python 2.4 as a supported Python version. If
>> we finish preparations in the next week, are there any ongoing
>> transitions a python2.6/python- defaults upload would entang
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 at 12:50:24 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> FWIW, here are some FTBFSes I've reported lately, which look due to
> this transition:
[...]
... and for those who care about FTBFSs, the binNMUs of pygtk are also all
failing (either due to #548211 or not waiting for python2.6-gobjec
Scott Kitterman (17/12/2009):
> I believe that we are getting close to uploading Python 2.6 to
> Unstable and dropping Python 2.4 as a supported Python version. If
> we finish preparations in the next week, are there any ongoing
> transitions a python2.6/python- defaults upload would entangle tha
19 matches
Mail list logo
