Bug#216740: marked as done (RFP: paq4 -- PAQ4 archiver)

2006-09-24 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:00:00 -0600
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line WNPP bug closing
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

---BeginMessage---
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

Licence: GNU GPL v2 or later

http://www.cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/ says:
PAQ4 Archiver
PAQ4 mixes models using adaptive rather than fixed weights, and also
includes an improved model for data with fixed length records. This is all
explained in the source code.

paq4.cpp Source code (Oct. 16, 2003)


The reason I bring this attention to the ppmd package maintainer is that
it seems that for at least some files, the PAQ line gives better results
than ppmd, ppmonster... In fact it seems that PAQ4 may have done better on
compression the Calgary Corpus than any other open source compressor.

I haven't looked into the algorithms and some testing may be needed anyway
to see whether this could be a valuable (more than ppmd) contribution to
Debian.

 Drew Daniels


---End Message---
---BeginMessage---
Hello,

This is an automatic mail sent to close the RFP you have reported or 
are involved with.

Your RFP wnpp bug is being closed because of the following reasons:
- It is, as of today, older than 365 days.
- It hasn't had any activity recently.

As this is an automatic procedure, it could of course have something
wrong and probably it would be closing some bugs that are not 
intended by owners and submitters (like you) to be closed, for
example if the RFP is still of your interest, or there has been 
some kind of activity around it. In that case, please reopen the
bug, do it, DO IT NOW! (I don't want to be blamed because of
mass closing and not let people know that they can easily reopen
their bugs ;-).

To re-open it, you simply have to mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a body text like this:

reopen 216740
thanks bts

Further comments on the work done in the bug sent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] would be truly welcomed.
Anyway, if you have any kind of problems when dealing with
the BTS, feel free to contact me and I'd be more than happy to help
you on this: [EMAIL PROTECTED].

A similar process is being applied to other kind of wnpp bugs.

Thanks for your cooperation,

 -- David Moreno Garza [EMAIL PROTECTED].
 
---End Message---


Bug#216740: marked as done (RFP: paq4 -- PAQ4 archiver)

2005-11-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:55:18 -0500 (CDT)
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line WNPP bug closed
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Oct 2003 17:49:09 +
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 20 12:48:03 2003
Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from electra.cc.umanitoba.ca [130.179.16.23] 
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1ABe8R-00065y-00; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:48:03 -0500
Received: from deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.179.16.69])
by electra.cc.umanitoba.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id 
h9KHlrS7018904
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:47:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.2) id h9KHlruZ022162;
Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:47:53 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:47:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: Drew Scott Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RFP: PAQ4 compressor
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-DCC-UofM-Metrics: electra 1033; IP=ok Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_70,HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_20
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_20 
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

Licence: GNU GPL v2 or later

http://www.cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/ says:
PAQ4 Archiver
PAQ4 mixes models using adaptive rather than fixed weights, and also
includes an improved model for data with fixed length records. This is all
explained in the source code.

paq4.cpp Source code (Oct. 16, 2003)


The reason I bring this attention to the ppmd package maintainer is that
it seems that for at least some files, the PAQ line gives better results
than ppmd, ppmonster... In fact it seems that PAQ4 may have done better on
compression the Calgary Corpus than any other open source compressor.

I haven't looked into the algorithms and some testing may be needed anyway
to see whether this could be a valuable (more than ppmd) contribution to
Debian.

 Drew Daniels


---
Received: (at 216740-done) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Sep 2005 02:56:04 +
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 14 19:56:04 2005
Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from dsl-201-129-37-187.prod-infinitum.com.mx (cerdita.damog.net) 
[201.129.37.187] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EFjut-0001Sq-00; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 19:56:04 -0700
Received: by cerdita.damog.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 2BAC8107BC6; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:55:18 -0500 (CDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: WNPP bug closed
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:55:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Moreno Garza)
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,VALID_BTS_CONTROL 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 490

Hello,

This is an automatic mail sent to close the RFP you have reported or 
are involved with.

Your RFP wnpp bug is being closed because of the following reasons:
- It is, as of today, older than 600 days.
- It haven't had any activity recently.
- The amount of ITPs on the Debian BTS is huge and we need to
  clean up a bit the place.

As this an automatic procedure, it could of course have something
wrong and probably it would be closing some bugs that are not 
intended by owners and submitters (like you) to be closed, for
example if the RFP is still of your interest, or there has been 
some kind of activity around it. In that case, please reopen the
bug, do it, DO IT NOW! (I don't want to be blamed because of
mass closing and not let people know that they can easily reopen
their bugs ;-).

To re-open it, you simply have to mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a body text like this:

reopen 123456
thanks bts

Replacing '123456' for the number of your RFP bug. The subject of the
mail is ignored. Or if you have any kind of problems when dealing with
the BTS, feel free to contact me and I'd be more than happy to help
you on this: [EMAIL PROTECTED].

This is the first mass wnpp closing that will be done.