On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 08:06:10 +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
> wget -r -np -nH --cut-dirs=1 \
> http://matzeri.altervista.org/cygwin-1.7/glpk/index.html
Uploaded.
> Remove glpk-4.46-1
Done.
Yaakov
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:56:56 -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> Jari Aalto: bzr, codeville, getmail, mercurial, offlineimap, planet,
> pylint, python-crypto, python-feedparser, python-logilab-astng,
> python-logilab-common, python-paramiko, spambayes, stgit, tailor,
> urlgrabber
> Ken Brown: bzr-fa
Given the problems that we seem to have with maintainers going absent
would it make sense to send out a periodic ping every M days to all
maintainers? Then if we didn't receive an answer within N pings the
package could be marked orphaned automatically.
The only thing to work out in the above sce
2013-02-03 19:58 Christopher Faylor
| Given the problems that we seem to have with maintainers going absent
| would it make sense to send out a periodic ping every M days to all
| maintainers? Then if we didn't receive an answer within N pings the
| package could be marked orphaned automatically.
On 2013-02-03 18:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Given the problems that we seem to have with maintainers going absent
> would it make sense to send out a periodic ping every M days to all
> maintainers? Then if we didn't receive an answer within N pings the
> package could be marked orphaned auto
On 2/3/2013 6:58 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Given the problems that we seem to have with maintainers going absent
would it make sense to send out a periodic ping every M days to all
maintainers? Then if we didn't receive an answer within N pings the
package could be marked orphaned automatica
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote:
>On 2013-02-03 18:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>Given the problems that we seem to have with maintainers going absent
>>would it make sense to send out a periodic ping every M days to all
>>maintainers? Then if we didn't receive an ans
