Hi Torsten,
thank you for reviewing the package!
On 04.01.2018 17:02, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> I marked your package for accept, but shouldn't that be better LGPL-2.1+
> instead of only LGPL-2.1?
Sure, I will change that with the next upload, which will happen quite soon.
Best
Ole
--
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi,
I can't find this build dependency?
$ grep pygtk debian/control
$
Cheers
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Hi,
since the new version obviously builds on amd64, may this bug be closed?
Cheers
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Ping?
I don't see a problem with the package, so I would close this bug (and
let plplot migrate) otherwise.
Cheers
Ole
On 02.10.2017 11:16, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On 30.09.2017 04:36, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> that still does not work as planned ... investiga
Hi Andreas,
On 30.09.2017 04:36, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> that still does not work as planned ... investigating ... trying to
> follow up with a patch later ...
coould yoou be a bit more verbose? Just "still does not work as planned"
is a bit short think of a fix.
Best
Ole
--
Hi Mo,
On 26.09.2017 09:23, Mo Jun wrote:
> It seems that this problem also exists in libplplot-dev package.
Thank you for the follow-up. I just uploaded 5.13.0+dfsg-5, which fixes
this.
Best regards
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
Hi Andreas,
On 22.09.2017 16:15, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
>
>> found 875911 5.13.0+dfsg-1~exp3
Could I ask you to explain that a bit more verbose?
The required install scripts (postinst preinst prerm) are there, so the
conversion
Hi Daniel,
I don't really see why you declare this failure as "serious". From the
source (and the bug name), it basically means that theano took a bit
longer to calculate than scipy for the same calculation. This may depend
on the scipy version and optimization, and also on the timing (load)
Hi Daniel,
the remaining numpy-1.12 failurtes can be resolved with this patch:
https://github.com/Theano/Theano/commit/a95f8af1b4c54a8ffa77fcd5f44cfdcb1772cf22
Cheers
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
Hi Andreas,
in clhep, the 2.1.4.1 releases were not in the git repository.
I corrected that, merged everything together, and now it compiles fine.
I took the freedom to just upload it :-)
Cheers
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
Hi Andreas,
I fixed this in the git; it is enough to change this package later (so
no need to re-upload yet).
Cheers
Ole
On 24.01.2017 17:51, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Ole,
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 05:30:12PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>>
>> This is just a typo: a &
On 05.01.2017 11:36, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 11:06:50AM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On 04.01.2017 20:57, Santiago Vila wrote:
>>> I still want to build all packages and have 0 or 1 failures,
>>> so in this case t
Hi Santiago,
On 04.01.2017 01:41, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2016, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Hello Ole. Thanks for your reply. Please don't forget to Cc: me if you
> expect your message to be read.
OK, however I usually assume that a bug submitter actually reads the
message
Hi Santiago,
> In particular, if something happens 1 every 20 times on average, the
> fact that it did not happen when you try 10 times does not mean in any
> way that it may not happen.
I must however say that I don't see why a package that fails to build
once in 20 builds would have a release
Control: tags 848112 pending
Hi all,
On 23.12.2016 10:08, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Ole, if you would please commit the patch you named in #848112 and
> upload the package to make sure it can migrate right in time and will
> enable other packages to migrate as well?
>
> HOWEVER, we have another
On 21.12.2016 19:16, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> They are still, what the name suggests: candidates, with no confirmation
>> to be useful in a production environment. I don't see why they should
>> ever migrate to testing (as they did in 1.11.1rc.1). Last time, we had
>> an numpy RC in testing for more
Hi Sandro,
On 21.12.2016 16:43, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Ole Streicher <oleb...@debian.org> wrote:
>> Sure; what I also don't understand is why numpy pushes its RC and betas
>> into unstable instead of experimental (and then maybe check or
On 21.12.2016 16:17, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I can clearly understand why Andreas is unhappy to see when such a
> change is uploaded without prior warning 1.5 months after the start
> of the freeze, and 1 week before an important deadline for his package.
Sure; what I also don't understand is why
Hi Adrian,
On 21.12.2016 15:29, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 02:05:57PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> ...
>> The according functions are since then marked as "deprecated" and issue
>> a warning. Numpy introduced this change with 1.11rc already,
Hi all,
On 21.12.2016 11:59, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:40:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> For python-skbio it is *really* time to panic *right now*.
> Thanks for confirming that I was not actually panicing. ;-)
While I agree in principle, I would like to remind the
Hi Richard,
I will try to reach Florian today as well, so that we can find a good
way to proceed here. Probably a shared team maintenance is the best.
For the other questions, I would ask you to follow-up to the Debian
Astronomy mailing list https://lists.debian.org/debian-astro
Altough the fits
Package: healpy
Version: 1.8.1-1
Severity: wishlist
Dear Leo,
please make the healpy package dependent from python-astropy and
python3-astropy instead of pyfits.
Pyfits is now an obsolete package and should be replaced by astropy.
There will be no further development of pyfits.
Best
Package: src:libfits-java
Version: 1.10.0-1
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: frothma...@lsw.uni-heidelberg.de, att...@submm.caltech.edu
Dear Florian,
your Debian libfits-java package is quite outdated; version 1.14.0 is
the current upstream version. Since a newer version if needed to package
the
I fixed this in the repository, 9c44c5d5ad. Shall I upload this or what
is the right way for a metapackage?
Cheers
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
Control: tag -1 upstream
Control: forwarded -1 PIPE-4905
The bug was forwarded to upstream and is registered under the mentioned
Id. Since the bug database is not public, an URL is not given.
The report to upstream includes all other failing platforms as well.
--
debian-science-maintainers
Control: tag -1 upstream
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/astropy/astropy/issues/2171
These problems are already forwarded to upstream. While the
test_composite_static_matrix_transform failure could be fixed by
increasing the tolerance, the checksum test failures would need to be
silenced
Control: tag -1 upstream
Control: forwarded -1 PIPE-4905
The bug was forwarded to upstream and is registered under the mentioned
Id. Since the bug database is not public, an URL is not given.
The report to upstream includes all other failing platforms as well.
--
debian-science-maintainers
Control: tag -1 upstream
Control: forwarded -1 PIPE-5106
The bug was forwarded to upstream and is registered under the mentioned
Id. Since the bug database is not public, an URL is not given.
It is not clear whether the problem belongs to cpl-plugin-kmos or to
cpl-6.4.1.
--
Dear astronomy enthusiasts,
the Debian Astronomy list was just created. This is a major step for an
astronomy specific Debian Blend.
The list has been created to concentrate the discussion about how to use
Debian in Astronomy, which packages we need, helping people in using
astronomy related
Control: forcemerge 734293 -1
r Zeitschleife :: gefangen in einer Zeitschleife :: gefangen in einer
Zeitschleife :: gefangen in eine
To escape the time loop, please update python-astropy to version
0.3+dfsg-3 on Ubuntu :-)
r Zeitschleife :: gefangen in einer Zeitschleife :: gefangen in einer
Control: reassign -1 ftp.debian.org
Control: affects -1 iausofa-c
Dear ftp masters,
as I wrote above, I have no idea how to fix this myself -- I think that
I followed the refman, but the package ended up in the wrong package.
Could I ask you to move the source package of iausofa-c/2013.12.02-1
I followed the developers reference 5.9.1 [1] (resp. I asked my sponsor
to do so):
If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change
the package control information to place the package in the desired
section, and re-upload the package (see the Debian Policy Manual for
Control: reassign -1 cpl-plugin-sinfo
I'll change this in cpl-plugin-sinfo.
Best
Ole
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
33 matches
Mail list logo
