On ശനി 10 ഡിസംബര് 2016 12:10 വൈകു, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> node-bl has been updated so node-tar-stream should be OK now !
You should commit tarballs with this name
node-tar-stream_1.5.2.orig.tar.gz (you committed
node-tar-stream-1.5.2.tar.gz). I have fixed it and uploaded, please
remember this
On 04/12/2016 10:06, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On ഞായര് 04 ഡിസംബര് 2016 02:18 വൈകു, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>> It should be low risk to upgrade because the command:
>> apt-cache rdepends node-bl
>>
>> returns:
>>
>> node-bl
>> Reverse Depends:
>> node-yawl
>>
>> The latter has a FTBFS big open for
On ഞായര് 04 ഡിസംബര് 2016 02:18 വൈകു, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> It should be low risk to upgrade because the command:
> apt-cache rdepends node-bl
>
> returns:
>
> node-bl
> Reverse Depends:
> node-yawl
>
> The latter has a FTBFS big open for about a year, git repo is basically
> stuck in
On 03/12/2016 17:59, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On വെള്ളി 02 ഡിസംബര് 2016 03:30 വൈകു, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>> I guess we can put this one on hold and wait for node-end-of-stream so
>> that tests can be enabled as well.
>
> node-end-of-stream is in the archive, but pristine-tar data is missing.
>
On വെള്ളി 02 ഡിസംബര് 2016 03:30 വൈകു, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> I guess we can put this one on hold and wait for node-end-of-stream so
> that tests can be enabled as well.
node-end-of-stream is in the archive, but pristine-tar data is missing.
Please push pristine-tar branch.
signature.asc
On 02/12/2016 10:12, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>
>
> On 2016, ഡിസംബർ 2 2:36:04 PM IST, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>> OK BTW on this one when I tried to reopen the ITP #753287 the BTS
>> replied "nope, the bug is archived!"
>>
>> So what is best here ? To unarchive it or to open a
On 2016, ഡിസംബർ 2 2:36:04 PM IST, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>OK BTW on this one when I tried to reopen the ITP #753287 the BTS
>replied "nope, the bug is archived!"
>
>So what is best here ? To unarchive it or to open a new one ?
>
I see the main purpose of ITP as way for