# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35
# ruby-pkg-tools 0.14 is not in stable
tags 486499 + lenny sid
___
Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.de
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35
> reassign 486499 webgen 0.3.8-2
Bug#486499: ruby-gnome2: wrong use of DEB_RUBY_LIBDIR
Bug reassigned from package `ruby-gnome2' to `webgen'.
>
End of message, stopping processing her
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:55, Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is an important distinction, IMHO, between what PET sees as
> "work in progress" and what we (pkg-ruby-extras) see as -wip: The
> later means they are packages which do not affect Debian's QA, as they
> have not yet been
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 13:43, Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ I am adding a Cc: to the debian-perl list, as the PET wizards live
> there and might have a say on this. Also, because the pkg-perl group
> has some packages which could be moved into a packages-wip
> directory, cleaning u
Package: libgdk-pixbuf2-ruby1.8
Version: 0.17.0~rc1-4
Severity: important
Run the below program on some image file:
"
#!/usr/bin/ruby
require 'gtk2'
unless ARGV.size == 1
puts "Syntax: pixbufmemleak.rb "
exit 1
end
imagefile = ARGV[0]
puts "Test image: #{imagefile}"
pixbuf = Gdk::Pixbuf.
On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:55:58 -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > I don't fully understand what you propose. What would be the logic
> > that PET should gain? If I read correctly the packages-wip directory
> > is used for packages that under PET are shown as WIP anyways... So
> > getting rid of it sounds
Martín Ferrari dijo [Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:37:16AM -0300]:
> > I do think packages-wip is a good thing to have. Maybe it would be
> > better to "export" the idea to other groups, and add support for it in
> > PET, just as an extra section?
>
> I don't fully understand what you propose. What woul
