Processed: Re: Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 444715 ftp.debian.org Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed? Bug reassigned from package `skippy' to `ftp.debian.org'. > retitle 444715 RM: skippy -- RoQA ; obsolete, RC buggy Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed? Changed Bug title to `RM: skippy -- RoQA ; obsolete, RC buggy' from `skippy: should this package be removed?'. > severity 444715 normal Bug#444715: RM: skippy -- RoQA ; obsolete, RC buggy Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
reassign 444715 ftp.debian.org retitle 444715 RM: skippy -- RoQA ; obsolete, RC buggy severity 444715 normal thanks On 19/12/07 at 08:37 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 19/12/07 at 13:59 +1100, Niv Sardi wrote: > > At 01:46 on Dec 19 2007, Lucas Nussbaum said : > > > > > clone 444715 -1 > > > reassign -1 wnpp > > > severity -1 normal > > > retitle -1 O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to > > > OSX > > > Expose > > > thanks > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. > > > I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this > > > orphaning could allow someone to adopt the package if appropriate. > > > > > > Please reply to this bug report if you feel that this package shouldn't > > > be removed. > > skippy has 1 RC bug, and 1 normal bug. > > > > As said by mail a few months ago, I have tagged this package 'help' for > > more than a year and nobody has stepped up. > > People usually don't magically step up in Debian. Please try to ask on > debian-devel@ (or in other relevant places) if someone could help. > > > the issue that is blocking skippy is amd64 only, (or at least only > > repported there) and said before, I DO NOT have a test machine, so I > > cannot reproduce the bug. > > > > I feel skippy can be usefull, and there is nothing providing the same > > kind of functionality, and hence it shouldn't be removed. > > It sounds like a much better idea to package and support skippy-xd... Hi, Have taking advice for others, I've decided that it was best to remove this package. It would be great if some people could concentrate on packaging skippy-rd now, since it sounds a lot more useful. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
On 19/12/07 at 13:59 +1100, Niv Sardi wrote: > At 01:46 on Dec 19 2007, Lucas Nussbaum said : > > > clone 444715 -1 > > reassign -1 wnpp > > severity -1 normal > > retitle -1 O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to OSX > > Expose > > thanks > > > > Hi, > > > > Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. > > I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this > > orphaning could allow someone to adopt the package if appropriate. > > > > Please reply to this bug report if you feel that this package shouldn't > > be removed. > skippy has 1 RC bug, and 1 normal bug. > > As said by mail a few months ago, I have tagged this package 'help' for > more than a year and nobody has stepped up. People usually don't magically step up in Debian. Please try to ask on debian-devel@ (or in other relevant places) if someone could help. > the issue that is blocking skippy is amd64 only, (or at least only > repported there) and said before, I DO NOT have a test machine, so I > cannot reproduce the bug. > > I feel skippy can be usefull, and there is nothing providing the same > kind of functionality, and hence it shouldn't be removed. It sounds like a much better idea to package and support skippy-xd... -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
At 01:46 on Dec 19 2007, Lucas Nussbaum said : > clone 444715 -1 > reassign -1 wnpp > severity -1 normal > retitle -1 O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to OSX > Expose > thanks > > Hi, > > Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. > I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this > orphaning could allow someone to adopt the package if appropriate. > > Please reply to this bug report if you feel that this package shouldn't > be removed. skippy has 1 RC bug, and 1 normal bug. As said by mail a few months ago, I have tagged this package 'help' for more than a year and nobody has stepped up. the issue that is blocking skippy is amd64 only, (or at least only repported there) and said before, I DO NOT have a test machine, so I cannot reproduce the bug. I feel skippy can be usefull, and there is nothing providing the same kind of functionality, and hence it shouldn't be removed. Cheers, -- Niv Sardi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > clone 444715 -1 Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed? Bug 444715 cloned as bug 456926. > reassign -1 wnpp Bug#456926: skippy: should this package be removed? Bug reassigned from package `skippy' to `wnpp'. > severity -1 normal Bug#456926: skippy: should this package be removed? Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > retitle -1 O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to OSX > Expose Bug#456926: skippy: should this package be removed? Changed Bug title to `O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to OSX Expose' from `skippy: should this package be removed?'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
clone 444715 -1 reassign -1 wnpp severity -1 normal retitle -1 O: skippy -- full-screen X11 task/window switcher, similar to OSX Expose thanks Hi, Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this orphaning could allow someone to adopt the package if appropriate. Please reply to this bug report if you feel that this package shouldn't be removed. Please also reply if you think that this package _should_ be removed, as this will allow to make the process quicker. Thank you, -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
On 15/10/07 at 08:38 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 15/10/07 at 11:47 +1000, Niv Sardi wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 16:13 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > While reviewing packages that were not included in Etch, your package > > > came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: > > > > > > * 1 RC bug opened for a long time. > > > > This bug is tagged help for a while and nobody has stepped in. > > Still, you are the maintainer, so you are the one supposed to find a way > to fix it ... Have you tried contacting the people who could help you? > Like the X.org team, or the upstream author? > > If the bug only affects a small number of systems, you also have the > solution to downgrade its severity until you can figure out exactly > what's needed to reproduce it... > > > > * useless with X.org, superseded by skippy-xd. > > > > It's only superseeded by skippy-xd on systems where composite runs > > reasonably fast, witch is only a little share of all. > > Last time I tried skippy, it was very slow. So, on machines where > compositing doesn't work reasonably fast, skippy is also probably very > slow... > > > > If you think that it should be orphaned instead of being removed from > > > Debian, please reply to this bug and tell so. > > > > I've been thinking about orphaning/removing skippy, but I still feel > > that it can be usefull to some. > > Fine, but please try to fix the problems: the package hasn't migrated to > testing for over a year and wasn't included in etch. There's not much > point in keeping in Debian if it's broken... Hi Niv, Any news on this issue? Thank you, -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
On 15/10/07 at 11:47 +1000, Niv Sardi wrote: > > On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 16:13 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Hi, > > > > While reviewing packages that were not included in Etch, your package > > came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: > > > > * 1 RC bug opened for a long time. > > This bug is tagged help for a while and nobody has stepped in. Still, you are the maintainer, so you are the one supposed to find a way to fix it ... Have you tried contacting the people who could help you? Like the X.org team, or the upstream author? If the bug only affects a small number of systems, you also have the solution to downgrade its severity until you can figure out exactly what's needed to reproduce it... > > * useless with X.org, superseded by skippy-xd. > > It's only superseeded by skippy-xd on systems where composite runs > reasonably fast, witch is only a little share of all. Last time I tried skippy, it was very slow. So, on machines where compositing doesn't work reasonably fast, skippy is also probably very slow... > > If you think that it should be orphaned instead of being removed from > > Debian, please reply to this bug and tell so. > > I've been thinking about orphaning/removing skippy, but I still feel > that it can be usefull to some. Fine, but please try to fix the problems: the package hasn't migrated to testing for over a year and wasn't included in etch. There's not much point in keeping in Debian if it's broken... -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 16:13 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Hi, > > While reviewing packages that were not included in Etch, your package > came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: > > * 1 RC bug opened for a long time. This bug is tagged help for a while and nobody has stepped in. > * useless with X.org, superseded by skippy-xd. It's only superseeded by skippy-xd on systems where composite runs reasonably fast, witch is only a little share of all. > If you think that it should be orphaned instead of being removed from > Debian, please reply to this bug and tell so. I've been thinking about orphaning/removing skippy, but I still feel that it can be usefull to some. > If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please > just close this bug, preferably in an upload also fixing the other > issues. ACK -- Niv -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?
Package: skippy Version: 0.5.1rc1-6 Severity: serious User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertags: proposed-removal Hi, While reviewing packages that were not included in Etch, your package came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: * 1 RC bug opened for a long time. * useless with X.org, superseded by skippy-xd. If you think that it should be orphaned instead of being removed from Debian, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you agree, sending the following commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED] should do it (after replacing nn with this bug's number): severity nn normal reassign nn ftp.debian.org retitle nn RM: -- RoM; thanks For more information, see http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please just close this bug, preferably in an upload also fixing the other issues. Thank you, -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
