Bug#723968: marked as done (RFS: cpl-plugin-sinfo/2.4.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- ESO data reduction pipeline SINFONI)
Your message dated Wed, 04 Dec 2013 04:25:05 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: cpl-plugin-sinfo/2.4.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- ESO data
reduction pipeline SINFONI
has caused the Debian Bug report #723968,
regarding RFS: cpl-plugin-sinfo/2.4.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- ESO data reduction
pipeline SINFONI
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
723968: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723968
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org,
debian -scie...@lists.debian.org
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for a number of plugins (currently five) for
the "cpl" library. Each plugin contains the software to process
("reduce" in the astronomer's slang) the data of one instrument mounted
at the Very Large Telescope (VLT) of the European Southern Telescope
(ESO) in Paranal. The structure of the plugins is very similar and is
based on a common template.
First package is "cpl-plugin-sinfo":
* Package name: cpl-plugin-sinfo
Version : 2.3.3-1
Upstream Author : Andrea Modigliani
* URL :
http://www.eso.org/sci/software/pipelines/sinfoni/sinfo-pipe-recipes.html
* License : GPL
Section : science
Binary packages:
cpl-plugin-sinfo - ESO data reduction pipeline SINFONI
cpl-plugin-sinfo-calib - ESO data reduction pipeline calibration data
for SINFONI
Source package URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cpl-plugin-sinfo
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cpl-plugin-sinfo/cpl-plugin-sinfo_2.3.3-1.dsc
SINFONI further information:
http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/paranal/instruments/sinfoni/
Best regards,
Ole
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package cpl-plugin-sinfo version 2.4.0+dfsg-1 is in NEW now,
and the package at mentors is not newer (2013-12-03) than the package in NEW
(2013-12-03),
so there is currently no package to sponsor.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/cpl-plugin-sinfo_2.4.0+dfsg-1.html
http://mentors.debian.net/package/cpl-plugin-sinfo
Please remove the package from mentors or mark it "needs sponsor = no".
If for some reason you need to replace the package in NEW,
then you can upload an updated package to mentors
and feel free to reopen this RFS 723968 or open a new RFS.--- End Message ---
Bug#676870: marked as done (RFS: lojban-common/1.5-6 -- commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language)
Your message dated Wed, 4 Dec 2013 14:42:35 +1100 with message-id <20131204034233.ga7...@benfinney.id.au> and subject line RFS: lojban-common/1.5+dfsg.1-1 -- commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language has caused the Debian Bug report #676870, regarding RFS: lojban-common/1.5-6 -- commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 676870: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=676870 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "hello": $ dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lojban-common/lojban-common_1.5-6.dsc It builds these binary packages: lojban-common - commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language More information about ‘lojban-common’ can be obtained from http://www.lojban.org/>. Changes since the last upload: lojban-common (1.5-6) unstable; urgency=low * The “Bots Build Bots” release. * debian/control: + Conform to ‘Standards-Version: 3.9.3’. No further changes needed. -- Ben Finney Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:54:38 +1000 lojban-common (1.5-5) UNRELEASED; urgency=low * The “Octopus Ballet” release. * debian/README.Debian, debian/NEWS.Debian, debian/lojban-common.docs: + Remove ancient news about current filenames, put it into the README. + Allow Debhelper to figure out which document files need installing. * debian/control, debian/compat, debian/rules: + Conform to ‘Standards-Version: 3.9.2’. + Use current recommended rules targets. + Use Debhelper version that supports recommended rules targets. * debian/copyright: + Update copyright notices and reformat to current DEP-5 specification. -- Ben Finney Sat, 30 Jul 2011 12:48:52 +1000 -- \“Why was I with her? She reminds me of you. In fact, she | `\reminds me more of you than you do!” —Groucho Marx | _o__) | Ben Finney --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Control: tags 676870 + wontfix Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package ‘lojban-common’: $ dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lojban-common/lojban-common_1.5+dfsg.1-1.dsc It builds these binary packages: lojban-common - commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language More information about ‘lojban-common’ can be obtained from http://www.lojban.org/>. Changes since the last upload: lojban-common (1.5+dfsg.1-1) unstable; urgency=low . * The “Goose Blues” release. * New upstream version to reflect change in which upstream files we get. * debian/get-orig-source, debian/upstream.sha1sums, debian/README.Debian: + Omit file ‘NORALUJV.txt’ which is not covered under a grant of license to redistribute. Thanks to David Prévot for NMU help. (Closes: bug#685279) * debian/copyright: + Declare conformance with copyright format version 1.0. * debian/*: + Update copyright notices. + Re-license original work under GPL-3+. * debian/control, debian/watch: + Update VCS fields following changes at Alioth. + Declare “Standards-Version: 3.9.5”. -- \“That's the essence of science: Ask an impertinent question, | `\and you're on the way to the pertinent answer.” —Jacob | _o__) Bronowski, _The Ascent of Man_, 1973 | Ben Finney signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#731296: RFS: lojban-common/1.5+dfsg.1-1 -- commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Control: tags 676870 + wontfix Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package ‘lojban-common’: $ dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lojban-common/lojban-common_1.5+dfsg.1-1.dsc It builds these binary packages: lojban-common - commonly-used wordlists for the Lojban language More information about ‘lojban-common’ can be obtained from http://www.lojban.org/>. Changes since the last upload: lojban-common (1.5+dfsg.1-1) unstable; urgency=low . * The “Goose Blues” release. * New upstream version to reflect change in which upstream files we get. * debian/get-orig-source, debian/upstream.sha1sums, debian/README.Debian: + Omit file ‘NORALUJV.txt’ which is not covered under a grant of license to redistribute. Thanks to David Prévot for NMU help. (Closes: bug#685279) * debian/copyright: + Declare conformance with copyright format version 1.0. * debian/*: + Update copyright notices. + Re-license original work under GPL-3+. * debian/control, debian/watch: + Update VCS fields following changes at Alioth. + Declare “Standards-Version: 3.9.5”. -- \“That's the essence of science: Ask an impertinent question, | `\and you're on the way to the pertinent answer.” —Jacob | _o__) Bronowski, _The Ascent of Man_, 1973 | Ben Finney signature.asc Description: Digital signature
command to use in deploy instructions for custom repo
Hello. I have a custom APT repo (for squeeze/wheezy/jessie) for my software and Readme page for it with install instructions. It contains the following line: echo "deb http://SOMEURL/debian/current $(lsb_release -sc) main"|sudo tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/SOMEREPO.list recently I found this line is wrong: 1) lsb_release is not available in some debian installs (minimal install? rasberry-pi ? ) 2) if user uses FISH as login shell , this expression "$(lsb_release -sc)" won't work. 3) probably some users would want to use "stable" instead of "wheezy" etc. What is the recommended way to write such install instructions?
Bug#731036: RFS: think-rotate/3.0-1
> We'd need to ask a lawyer to get an useful answer to that question, I think. The problem is that I do not know a lawyer that I could just ask. And I am German, another dev is American, so I have no idea whether to ask a German or an American lawyer. We already have the name in the description. I mean, it would be pointless to avoid this name. It serves as identification, not really using the trademark to sell our “product”. From my common sense view, it should be okay, but I am a scientist, not a lawyer … > Mostly because the package would not contain the > majority of the stand-alone thinkpad-specific tools and utils (such as tpb, > thinkbat, thinkfan, etc). That is the problem, it is just screen rotation and docking. “-scripts” sounds like some assorted scripts, and does not feel like it is claiming to be complete like “-utils” would. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#731036: RFS: think-rotate/3.0-1
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013, Martin Ueding wrote: > Okay, “thinklight” does not count, then. > > The question is, whether using “thinkpad-” would cause any trouble with > trademarks? We'd need to ask a lawyer to get an useful answer to that question, I think. > I think “thinkpad-utils” or “thinkpad-tools” or “thinkpad-scripts” is an > improvement. Would those be okay with you? > > The problem is that it started as a single rotation script and then > evolved into a collection of scripts that do docking, rotating and other > stuff. The earlier the rename is, the less work it is. I like "thinkpad-scripts". I think "thinkpad-tools" would not be a good idea, nor would "thinkpad-utils", though. Mostly because the package would not contain the majority of the stand-alone thinkpad-specific tools and utils (such as tpb, thinkbat, thinkfan, etc). -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131203190126.gb20...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Bug#731036: RFS: think-rotate/3.0-1
Okay, “thinklight” does not count, then. The question is, whether using “thinkpad-” would cause any trouble with trademarks? I think “thinkpad-utils” or “thinkpad-tools” or “thinkpad-scripts” is an improvement. Would those be okay with you? The problem is that it started as a single rotation script and then evolved into a collection of scripts that do docking, rotating and other stuff. The earlier the rename is, the less work it is. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#731036: RFS: think-rotate/3.0-1
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013, Martin Ueding wrote: > https://github.com/martin-ueding/think-rotate/issues/26 > > It looks like there is no `thinkpad-` package in Ubuntu or Debian, but > several with `think` in them. Does it really make sense to rename this > to `thinkpad`, when there are other packages like `thinkfinger` and > `thinklight`? thinklight is the (trademarked!) name of a ThinkPad "thinkvantage" feature, which I hope will come back someday, just like proper LCD screens came back with the 2013/2014's series-40 (as long as you get a FHD/FHD+/3K IPS screen, that is). I don't know about thinkfinger, it is a bit of a misnomer as it is not even thinkpad-specific in the first place. I'd have complained about it had I noticed it in time. IMHO, the "think-rotate" naming is weird, but given that we accepted "thinkfinger", it is not a big deal. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131203173404.ga20...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Bug#716905: marked as done (RFS: goodbye/0.3-1 [ITP])
Your message dated Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:27:06 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: goodbye/0.3-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #716905, regarding RFS: goodbye/0.3-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 716905: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=716905 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Hi folks! After a yet another remark: 16:32 < daemonkeeper> Too bad Adam never uploaded goodbye! I'd like to request a sponsor for this infamous packaging example. While I seriously hope no one follows it directly, it has an educational value of showing how the .deb format works, and how to create a package using only low-level tools. And hey, it's still said to be saner than waf and yada. It's dgettable by: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/goodbye/goodbye_0.3-1.dsc It is lintian --pedantic clean, matches the wording of the Policy (but might not match its spirit...), and doesn't use cdbs. Let's add some WTF to FTPmasters' day! :) Meow! --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package goodbye has been removed from mentors.--- End Message ---
Bug#729354: Uscan Files-Excluded (Was: [SoB] Re: RFS: auto-07p/0.9.1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- software for continuation and bifurcation problems in ODE)
Hi, On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 05:56:05PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: > > Well, considering that you had > > > >./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources > > > > where exactly is the problem that you can not give pattern by pattern > > comments? > > Yep. Perhaps, this is a reason to improve this comment. >From my perspective there is no reason for this. It would not be machine readable in any case. Also IMHO this information fits better in debian/copyright. > Anyway, I would like to adopt something like this > for others my packages as well. And this issue is still relevant. > > Another Files-like paragraphs seems to be a sulution. > See e.g. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685506#32 >From my perspective a "solution" is something what is implemented. More than 10 monthes have passed since this *suggestion* and nobody minded about some competing *solution* to Files-Excluded. I did a lot of work explaining both alternatives on the Wiki page (it is removed now since devscripts authors accepted the implemented code for Files-Excluded in Git). Since Debian is a Do-O-cracy those things are winning that can attract volunteers who *do* the actual work. The other alternative did not which in turn means it was not convincing enough. > The solution in > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685506#50 > is not just "not nice", it's less machine-readable. In how far do comments need to be machine readable. We are talking about comments and comments are by definition free text and there is no need to parse this. So I keep on failing to see the advantage of "Removed-Files" over "Files-Excluded" and your arguments do not really convince me. > PS: I'm DM, so - you can grant me upload permission > for this package if you trust my work enough. Fine for me but if I'm not misleaded the package needs to pass new before this permission can be granted. Kind regards Andreas. PS: There is no point in CCing me - I'm reading debian-science list. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131203150226.ge23...@an3as.eu
Bug#729354: [SoB] Re: RFS: auto-07p/0.9.1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- software for continuation and bifurcation problems in ODE
> Well, considering that you had > >./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources > > where exactly is the problem that you can not give pattern by pattern > comments? Yep. Perhaps, this is a reason to improve this comment. Anyway, I would like to adopt something like this for others my packages as well. And this issue is still relevant. Another Files-like paragraphs seems to be a sulution. See e.g. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685506#32 The solution in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685506#50 is not just "not nice", it's less machine-readable. > I was wrong in my previous mail. > commit 0ad53cbac9e7e46fe1dee4df774bdcab9ba2faaa > was inside the repository and it is uploaded. ok. PS: I'm DM, so - you can grant me upload permission for this package if you trust my work enough. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131203135605.ga7...@darkstar.order.hcn-strela.ru
Bug#731036: RFS: think-rotate/3.0-1
I talked about this with another developer: https://github.com/martin-ueding/think-rotate/issues/26 It looks like there is no `thinkpad-` package in Ubuntu or Debian, but several with `think` in them. Does it really make sense to rename this to `thinkpad`, when there are other packages like `thinkfinger` and `thinklight`? -- http://martin-ueding.de/#pk_campaign=Email signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
