Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-12 Thread Torsten Landschoff
reopen 71107 retitle 71107 Explorer is unmaintained and should be removed thanks On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:27:00AM +1200, Michael Beattie wrote: It's orphaned. And has been for about 7 months. The maintainer should be debian-qa, but it has not been reset to that. ...that would

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-09 Thread Ivan E. Moore II
I would also recommend removing explorer as it depends on a non-existant package (qt1g and not libqt1g) and therefore isn't installable. done. I cannot remove explorer unless the maintainer asks. besides, it should be recompilable with qt2.2. ok...the source we (Debian) have for

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-09 Thread Michael Beattie
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 06:39:36PM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: As it is now the current package does not work, cannot be installed due to dependencies, and it's not part of main. The last few uploads have been done as NMU's... that in itself could suggest that it could be removed. but...

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-09 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
Michael Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The maintainer may be unaware of our conversation, (god knows why) and may be working on an upload as we speak. IMO, its the same philosophy as doing a NMU. Oh, yeah. http://bugs.debian.org/68274 It's orphaned. And has been for about 7

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-09 Thread Ivan E. Moore II
The maintainer may be unaware of our conversation, (god knows why) and may be working on an upload as we speak. IMO, its the same philosophy as doing a NMU. Oh, yeah. http://bugs.debian.org/68274 It's orphaned. And has been for about 7 months. The maintainer should be

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

2000-09-09 Thread Michael Beattie
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:01:00AM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: Oh, yeah. http://bugs.debian.org/68274 It's orphaned. And has been for about 7 months. The maintainer should be debian-qa, but it has not been reset to that. ...that would explain it. :) righto then, if