Hi Andreas Bas,
It looks like you fixed all issues during my FOSS4G conference absence.
Thanks a lot!
Pirmin
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2013, 17.53:55 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg:
Hi Andreas,
On 09/19/2013 02:49 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 01:41:41PM +0200,
: osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg-4.dsc refers to non-existing file:
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg.orig.tar.gz
Perhaps you need to include it in your upload?
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new
@lists.alioth.debian.org, Bas
Couwenberg sebas...@xs4all.nl, ti...@debian.org
Subject: osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg-4.dsc refers to non-existing file:
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg.orig.tar.gz
Perhaps you need to include it in your upload?
===
Please feel free
Hi Bas,
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
Which means 2.1.1+dfsg-1 and 2.4-[23] are missing - no idea about
2.4-1. Pirmin, could you please shed some light into this?
Most outdated GIS packages in Debian are usually more actively
maintained in the
Hi Andreas,
On 09/19/2013 02:49 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
It's probably a good idea to rename the tags to ubuntu/version to
reflect the destination of the packaging.
Yes, please!
The two Debian releases can be
tagged
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg-4.dsc refers to non-existing file:
osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg.orig.tar.gz
Perhaps you need to include it in your upload?
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
6 matches
Mail list logo
