Hi,
Globally we agree but I can't help but correct a few things.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 07:38:47PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:20:46 +0100 Sylvain wrote:
> Yes, that is likely the case, except I thought I forwarded the initial
> bug report to the maintainer addresses. Perh
On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:20:46 +0100 Sylvain wrote:
> First, I just received a notification of this package being marked for
> removal. I never received any previous notification about this bug
> while I'm subscribed to all BTS notifications. Maybe this comes from
> this weird second entry in the
Hi Stephen,
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 06:33:04PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:20:46 +0100, Sylvain wrote:
> [...]
> > With regard to gargoyle-free in particular: the package is inactive
> > upstream so it's probably best to let the package die and reintroduce
Hi Sylvain,
On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:20:46 +0100, Sylvain wrote:
[...]
> With regard to gargoyle-free in particular: the package is inactive
> upstream so it's probably best to let the package die and reintroduce
> it in Debian when they actually make a new release.
I looked into it quickly yester
Hi,
First, I just received a notification of this package being marked for
removal. I never received any previous notification about this bug
while I'm subscribed to all BTS notifications. Maybe this comes from
this weird second entry in the BTS about reassignment (meaning no
maintainers got it?
Source: gargoyle-free
Version: 2011.1a-3.1
Severity: serious
User: pkg-fonts-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: license-violation
X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-fonts-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Your source package contains an GPL/LGPL font:
fonts/LiberationMono-BoldItalic.ttf
fonts/LiberationMono-Bold
6 matches
Mail list logo
