On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:52:16AM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:45:28AM +0200, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Other than that, the package looks much better now. I still
haven't checked all little details, though, but I think this is
almost ready for uploading.
On 06/16/15 at 02:12pm, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 11:40:03AM +0200, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Following Berto's recommendation, I repackaged mutt-kz as a mutt's
alternative. I had to rebase several patches applied to mutt and it
seems to work OK.
Last Saturday I
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:45:28AM +0200, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Other than that, the package looks much better now. I still
haven't checked all little details, though, but I think this is
almost ready for uploading.
Do we have an ITP bug for mutt-kz? I haven't found it.
I
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 11:40:03AM +0200, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Following Berto's recommendation, I repackaged mutt-kz as a mutt's
alternative. I had to rebase several patches applied to mutt and it
seems to work OK.
Last Saturday I uploaded the package again:
Following Berto's recommendation, I repackaged mutt-kz as a mutt's
alternative. I had to rebase several patches applied to mutt and it seems to
work OK.
Last Saturday I uploaded the package again:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/mutt-kz
vmjl
On 06/11/15 at 09:46am, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 11:03:09AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
The problem I see, and I'm not sure how to solve it, is that mutt
and mutt-kz are mutually exclusive, they cannot be both installed.
What is the problem exactly here? Shared libraries?
As far as I can see there's several
On 05/19/15 at 09:02pm, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
That you do! :) A good way to start is to upload your package to
mentors.debian.net and check the results there:
https://mentors.debian.net/
Finally I did it last weekend:
Your upload of the package 'mutt-kz' to mentors.debian.net was
On 2015-06-08 05:05:55, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
The problem I see, and I'm not sure how to solve it, is that mutt and mutt-kz
are mutually exclusive, they cannot be both installed.
What is the problem exactly here? Shared libraries?
a.
--
Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken!
On 2015-05-15 11:54:11, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
On 05/15/15 at 08:18am, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
On 2015-05-15 07:27:04, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up.
Finally I used gitlab:
https://gitlab.com/vjaquez-misc/mutt-kz
That's great! :)
So what's the next step
On 05/14/15 at 08:09am, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
Also I will sync to v1.5.23.1
I expect to do it this weekend.
Done!
Great!
Did you mean gitlab though? There's already this:
https://gitlab.com/vjaquez-misc/mutt-kz
gitorious can migrate to gitlab automatically and gitlab open
On 2015-05-15 07:27:04, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up.
Finally I used gitlab:
https://gitlab.com/vjaquez-misc/mutt-kz
That's great! :)
So what's the next step here... do you need someone to sponsor the
package? Should more communication be done with upstream/debian
On 05/15/15 at 08:18am, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
On 2015-05-15 07:27:04, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up.
Finally I used gitlab:
https://gitlab.com/vjaquez-misc/mutt-kz
That's great! :)
So what's the next step here... do you need someone to sponsor the
package?
On 2015-05-14 05:41:03, Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote:
On 05/13/15 at 10:19pm, anar...@debian.org wrote:
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 10:43:26PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Heya, +1 as well on the desire of having mutt-kz in Debian.
+1 as well...
Has anyone verified with the security team
On 05/13/15 at 10:19pm, anar...@debian.org wrote:
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 10:43:26PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Heya, +1 as well on the desire of having mutt-kz in Debian.
+1 as well...
Has anyone verified with the security team if either approach would be
acceptable for them?
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 10:43:26PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Heya, +1 as well on the desire of having mutt-kz in Debian.
+1 as well...
Has anyone verified with the security team if either approach would be
acceptable for them?
What's the opinion of the Mutt maintainer on the two
Heya, +1 as well on the desire of having mutt-kz in Debian.
On Sun, 9 Feb 2014 19:29:28 +0100 Víctor M. Jáquez L. vjaq...@igalia.com
wrote:
I used to maintain a fork of the mutt debian package[1], handling the
mutt-kz patches with quilt. Trying to resync this weekend the patches,
I found that
I used to maintain a fork of the mutt debian package[1], handling the mutt-kz
patches with quilt. Trying to resync this weekend the patches, I found that
the sources have diverted so much, that this strategy is not practical
anymore.
So, I've setup a debian packaging for mutt-kz using
17 matches
Mail list logo
