Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-17 Thread Noritada Kobayashi
reassign 490305 libglib2-ruby1.8 0.17.0~rc1-5 tag 490305 + patch thanks Hi Lucas, 2008/9/17 Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 09/09/08 at 08:39 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: >> > 2008/9/7 Thomas Viehmann: >> > > Noritada Kobayashi wrote: >> > >> Please wait a little while. This issue may n

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-17 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
reassign 490305 kazehakase 0.5.4-2.1 thanks Hi Noritada, On 09/09/08 at 08:39 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > 2008/9/7 Thomas Viehmann: > > > Noritada Kobayashi wrote: > > >> Please wait a little while. This issue may not be resulted from a bug > > >> inside Kazehakase. > > > > > > I can't spea

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-08 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
reassign 490305 libgtk2-ruby1.8 0.17.0~rc1-5 thanks (Yeah, another RC for ruby-gnome2) On 09/09/08 at 13:53 +0900, Noritada Kobayashi wrote: > reassign 490305 ruby1.8 > thanks It's usually a good idea to Cc @packages.debian.org when you reassign a bug. > This bug may be a GC bug of Ruby 1.8. A

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-08 Thread Noritada Kobayashi
reassign 490305 ruby1.8 thanks Hi, This bug may be a GC bug of Ruby 1.8. Also, this is reported as Bug 456816[1] on Fedora's BTS and the report shows us that the bug got unreproducible with ruby 1.8.6.287-1.fc10. So, I reassign the bug to ruby1.8. Please change the severity if it is not approp

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-07 Thread Thomas Viehmann
Hi, thanks for you quick response. Noritada Kobayashi wrote: > Please wait a little while. This issue may not be resulted from a bug > inside Kazehakase. I can't speak for the release team, but I'd like to point out that a little while is more likely be measured in lower single-digit number of

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-06 Thread Noritada Kobayashi
Hi, 2008/9/7 Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > at almost two months #490305 (segfault on startup) isn't exactly a brand > new bug, yet there has been no maintainer response. It has no reverse > dependencies and only 95 "votes" in popcon. > > As such it appears that kazehakase is a removal can

Bug#490305: remove kazehakase?

2008-09-06 Thread Thomas Viehmann
Hi, at almost two months #490305 (segfault on startup) isn't exactly a brand new bug, yet there has been no maintainer response. It has no reverse dependencies and only 95 "votes" in popcon. As such it appears that kazehakase is a removal candidate. Kind regards T. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://t