Bug#969387: ITP: wyhash -- fast, high-quality, portable hash function

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Benjamin Barenblat * Package name: wyhash Version : 0~1.gbpd15d6e7 Upstream Author : Wang Yi * URL : https://github.com/wangyi-fudan/wyhash * License : Unlicense Programming Lang: C Description : fast, high

Bug#963767: RFP: mathjax-node-page -- filter for server-side MathJax rendering

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: mathjax-node-page Version : 3.2.0 Upstream Author : Peter Krautzberger * URL : https://github.com/pkra/mathjax-node-page/ * License : Apache-2.0 Programming Lang: JavaScript Description : filter for

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 2:39 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote: > This is now in the NEW queue. On Friday, June 19, 2020, at 8:07 AM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > Not anymore and not in the archives. What happened? Can I help? ftp-master rejected the upload with concerns that ch

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

This is now in the NEW queue.

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Tuesday, May 19, 2020, at 8:59 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > Doesn't build with GCC 10 due to symbol changes. Good point. Is there an established way to deal with this? Or should I just upload this as-is to unstable and then upload a GCC-10-compatible version to experimental? >

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

Okay, we’re all set. I’ve pushed my work to https://salsa.debian.org/debian/abseil, and both command-line linking and CMake integration work. Comments and suggestions are welcome – if I don’t hear anything in the next day or two, I’ll go ahead and upload to NEW. I had to disable the Abseil

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Thursday, May 7, 2020, at 6:32 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > If I understand correctly, you retained src:abseil. If not and using > src:abseil-cpp then you need a new repository named after that. Which > way should I go? If it’s all right with you, I’d prefer to stick with

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

I’m getting very close to an Abseil upload. The CMake integration doesn’t work yet, but I can install the binary packages and build software that links Abseil. I’m going to keep working on CMake support, but I’d love to upload what I have to Salsa. Would somebody be willing to reset the

Bug#888705: Bug#959675: libgrpc++1: endless looping with default settings

That sounds 100% feasible. I’ll give Abseil packaging some more attention this week and get back in touch.

Bug#888705: Bug#959675: libgrpc++1: endless looping with default settings

On Sunday, May 3, 2020, at 8:16 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > Benjamin, do you want to package and maintain [Abseil] instead? I’ve been working on packaging it for the last few weeks, and I’m making good progress. Would an upload this week fit your timetable?

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Sunday, February 16, 2020, at 10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > @Benjamin: may you ask its developers to use the system gtest libraries > if only ABSL_RUN_TESTS set to ON? On Tuesday, February 18, 2020, at 6:02 PM -0500, Benjamin Barenblat wrote: > I have a preliminar

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: >>> @Benjamin: may you ask its developers to use the system gtest libraries >>> if only ABSL_RUN_TESTS set to ON? On Monday, February 17, 2020, at 8:21 PM -0500, Benjamin Barenblat wrote: >> Absolutely. I’ll bring it up with th

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Tuesday, February 18, 2020, at 9:25 AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > What about the C++ std version? Abseil / C++14 isn't the same as Abseil / > C++17. This is true on two levels: 1. By default, Abseil detects what standard version you’re building with and conditionally defines

Bug#888705: abseil-cpp packaging

On Sunday, February 16, 2020, at 10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > In my reading abseil is _not_ guaranteed to have ABI compatibility at > all times. That's why it meant to be a static library collection only. > Forcing it to build shared libraries and have other packages than >

Bug#888705: ITP: abseil -- Collection of C++ code (compliant to C++11) designed to augment the C++ standard library

It looks like there hasn’t been any activity on this for a while. I hear there’s going to be a new Abseil LTS release sometime in the next few weeks; would it be all right if I took this bug and packaged Abseil once the LTS hits GitHub? (Full disclosure: I work at Google and sit near some Abseil

Bug#903143: RFA: dafny

Package: wnpp Severity: normal I request an adopter for the dafny package. The package description is: Dafny is a programming language with a program verifier. The verifier processes function preconditions, postconditions, and assertions, and sends them to an SMT solver for checking. In

Bug#903142: RFA: boogie -- verifiable programming language (compiler)

Package: wnpp Severity: normal I request an adopter for the boogie package. The package description is: Boogie is a compiler intermediate language with support for automatic invariant checking using an SMT solver such as Z3. It supports program verification for a variety of other,

Bug#543296: pycdio: taking ITP

retitle 543296 ITP: pycdio -- Python interface to libcdio optical media control library owner 543296 ! thanks Hearing nothing, I'm going to take a crack at this.

Bug#892752: RFP: ipcalc-nmav -- parameter calculator for IPv4 and IPv6 addresses

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: ipcalc-nmav Version : 0.2.2 Upstream Author : Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos * URL : https://github.com/nmav/ipcalc * License : GPL-2 Programming Lang: C Description : parameter calculator for

Bug#543296: Still interested in packaging?

Are you still interested in packaging pycdio? If so, I can review and sponsor your uploads.

Bug#880570: ITP: xcwd -- X current working directory

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Benjamin Barenblat <bba...@mit.edu> * Package name: xcwd Upstream Author : Adrien Schildknecht <adrien+...@schischi.me> * URL : https://github.com/schischi/xcwd/ * License : BSD-3-clause Programming Lang: C Descrip

Bug#866334: ITP: lean -- theorem prover from Microsoft Research

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:37:53PM -0400, Benjamin Barenblat wrote: > > Description : theorem prover from Microsoft Research On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 1:41:57 AM, Julian Andres Klode <j...@debian.org> wrote: > I don't think we need the company advertisement here, t

Bug#866334: ITP: lean -- theorem prover from Microsoft Research

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Benjamin Barenblat <bba...@mit.edu> * Package name: lean Version : 3.2.0 Upstream Author : Leonardo de Moura <leona...@microsoft.com> et al. * URL : https://leanprover.github.io/ * License : Apache-2.0 Prog

Bug#864433: RFP: hindent -- automatic Haskell code formatter

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: hindent Version : 5.2.3 Upstream Author : Chris Done * URL : https://github.com/commercialhaskell/hindent * License : BSD3 Programming Lang: Haskell Description : automatic Haskell

Bug#857108: RFP: html-minifier -- HTML compressor/minifier

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: html-minifier Version : 3.4.0 Upstream Author : Juriy Zaytsev * URL : https://github.com/kangax/html-minifier * License : Expat Programming Lang: JavaScript Description : HTML

Bug#850541: RFP: whipper -- CD ripper preferring accuracy over speed

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: whipper Version : 0.4.1 Upstream Author : Joe Lametta * URL : https://github.com/JoeLametta/whipper * License : GPL-3+ Programming Lang: Python Description : CD

Bug#763499: RFP: uselessd -- a project to reduce systemd to a base initd, process supervisor and transactional dependency system, while minimizing intrusiveness and isolationism.

control: tags -1 wontfix Upstream has abandoned uselessd as described on their site.

Bug#747824: RFP: atom -- hackable editor

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Debian policy does not require every file in the distribution to have a copyright/licence header. Given that Atom has a top-level LICENSE.md, you should assume that licence applies to any files which do not have explicit copyright/licence headers.