Scribit Thomas Huriaux dies 22/05/2006 hora 01:03:
nous avons au fil du temps établi une série de choix (qu'il serait
trop long de documenter)
La l10n serait-elle de la magie noire ? Depuis quand la complexité d'un
sujet justifie-t-elle de ne pas le documenter ?! J'ai toujours pensé
qu'il en
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:55:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected a DPL
every year. Of course, since I'm not one,
Am Sonntag, den 21.05.2006, 15:58 -0500 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
No, if we should discuss before taking any action we wouldn't get
anything done.
Oh, come on. Nobody expects you to ask before updating a simple package.
If you really want to contest the decision, you have the
GR.
ROFL, yes,
dotlock (1) - manual page for dotlock (GNU Mailutils 0.6.93)
This is the default NAME section generated by help2man. Fairly useless,
but there needs to be *some* default.
Suggest that you file bugs on the particular packages which need either
to provide a --name=short description
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 21 May 2006 20:20:09 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
It's an important document and certainly something that every developer
should read and endeavor to follow where it makes sense, but things go
into the Developer's Reference rather than Policy
Juergen A Erhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:55:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected a
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:58:18PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Oh, and the impression that pushing non-free packages in after several
hours has a high priority, while (license-wise) simple packages linger
for weeks in NEW was probably a bonus[1].
I have to agree this sucks but if you
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 04:17:52PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I'm afraid I have more interesting things to do than helping non-free
software developers to get their non-free crap in the non-free archive.
Good, but you shouldn't decide what others have to do. Some people are
interested
the project by not consulting you first is so much bullshit, because *they*
are the ones who bear the primary liability from distributing these
packages, and other developers (as opposed to mirror operators) bear none at
all. They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 08:01:34AM +0200, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:55:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the
On 19 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
setools is in the list, and contains libraries that it uses
itself, but does not break it up into multiple installed
packages. Setools is moving rapidly rnough that I do not intend to
support multiple versions of the libraries until things
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 05:03:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Er, of course we all might be affected by it, but the ftpmasters would be
affected *way* more by getting sued than *we* would be affected by their
getting sued, so I think it's ridiculously presumptuous to criticize the
Who should
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:29:42AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 10:18:19PM +0200, Nacho Barrientos Arias wrote:
IMHO, pari-gp-c or pari-gp2c could be better than 'gp2c' to avoid
this namespace pollution, at your option.
Good catch, I will consider this option. gp2c
On 15 May 2006, Bastian Blank told this:
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 06:10:52AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I propose to file bugs against the packages before the end of this
week, and, after a couple of weeks, for packages that haven't been
fixed already, start making NMUs (via DELAYED/7, since
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Indeed, they will bear the *primary* liability. However if legal action
is taken against them or our mirror operators because of their decision,
the whole distribution process might
On Sun, 21 May 2006 23:25:28 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 21 May 2006 20:20:09 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
It's an important document and certainly something that every developer
should read and endeavor to follow where it makes sense, but things
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 08:01 +0200, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected a DPL
every year. Of course, since I'm not one, I got that wrong./sarcasm
You seem to be thinking that a democracy equals that everyone has a say
in every decision.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Adam Céile (Le_Vert) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm packaging theses tools, right now !
* Package name: cobalt-panel-utils
Version : 1.0.2
Upstream Author : Jeff Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 19 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
setools is in the list, and contains libraries that it uses
itself, but does not break it up into multiple installed
packages. Setools is moving rapidly rnough that I do not intend to
On Sun, 2006-05-21 at 22:56 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 22:38 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit :
Given this legal background of yours, could you please help by using that
to improve the licence, instead of just complaining about how others
handled it? Please give
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 17:03 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
This is the whole point of the discussion.
Not that I can see. Your preceding post focused on the *who* and the *how*
of the decision, *not* on the what.
This is all entangled. Had this decision been taken in a transparent way
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 10:27:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- Allow arch specific depends
I propose to use Depends: pkg:arch (= 1.2-3) as syntax for
thses. While for etch no package should
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 11:26:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected a
DPL every year. Of course, since I'm not
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 11:26:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
That would make Debian, at most, a republic, not a democracy.
Would you care to elaborate and explain it isn't a democratic republic
then?
Debian's delegate system makes it very strongly
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:25:35AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 17:03 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
No, I'm acknowledging that the ftpmasters have no obligation to do as *you*
say. The ftp-masters aren't the ones trying to tell other people what to do
in this
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 12:34:00PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
In that case, ftpmasters accepted it, end of discussion. You HAVE to
accept decisions of delegates within Debian, that's how we can effectively
work.
But that means that ALL delegates have to be either elected or appointed
by
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 04:04:37PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
No I don't answer to shut up. I answer to stop now because Anthony Tows
responded to all the questions and give a precise course of action on how
we can continue improving the situation concerning the java licensing.
So he should
On 5/22/06, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Given the word estoppel only has meaning in jurisdictions deriving
from English common law, I think it'd be silly to assume it works the
way you think it does in any of the other jurisdictions
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 10:50 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez
on my server I couldn't become legal again by just removing it. My
prior action would still get me sued, doesn't it? And no, just saying
I thought it was okay, doesn't
On 5/22/06, Thijs Kinkhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 10:50 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez
on my server I couldn't become legal again by just removing it. My
prior action would still get me sued, doesn't
Le lundi 22 mai 2006 à 10:46 +0200, Michael Meskes a écrit :
And I'm pissed of that so much seems to happen behind the scenes and I
as a normal developer who did not go to Mexico do not get the info even
if I ask, but instead people are just told to shut up.
Even people in Oaxtepec have learnt
Le Lun 22 Mai 2006 01:46, Steve Langasek a écrit :
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:06:42AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I personally thinks it hurts our users, and as a secondary effect,
us. Beeing distributable is a property that should not be depends
upon the time, the color of your hair, or
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:29:05AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 10:50 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez
on my server I couldn't become legal again by just removing it. My
prior action would still get me
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:24:38AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 08:01 +0200, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected a DPL
every year. Of course, since I'm not one, I got that wrong./sarcasm
You seem to be
Heya,
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Java flamewar]
DPL, I wonder Why the Sun-Java package is not handled the same as any
other package. What makes it so special that it deserves special
treatment?
Isn't this a discrimination against all other packages? :-)
ACK. This is the most
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:51:21AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 11:26:26PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
That would make Debian, at most, a republic, not a democracy.
Would you care to elaborate and explain it isn't a
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
license agreement; and (f) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun
and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees)
incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:50:22AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 04:04:37PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Fears are unfounded, we can at any time terminate the license by removing
java!
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez on
my
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:35:41PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
You are told by a programmer that you are allowed to offer their
software on your server, but the programmer also tells you that his
statement is legally not binding and the license says you are not
allowed to offer it. Then you
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:03:25PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le lundi 22 mai 2006 à 10:46 +0200, Michael Meskes a écrit :
And I'm pissed of that so much seems to happen behind the scenes and I
as a normal developer who did not go to Mexico do not get the info even
if I ask, but instead
Scripsit Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Henning Makholm wrote:
How does sending directly to from reportbug to an ISP's smarthost
validate the user's email address better than sending directly from
reportbug to a HTTP POST somewhere?
I'm talking about an HTTP access
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:22:25AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
Heya,
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Java flamewar]
DPL, I wonder Why the Sun-Java package is not handled the same as any
other package. What makes it so special that it deserves special
treatment?
Hi!
On Monday 22 May 2006 13:35, you wrote:
They won't sue us for distributing Java. If they do, all we have to do
is point the Judge to the press coverage of this change of license, and
to the fact that Debian was mentioned as one of the distributors asked
to please distribute Java.
Hex Star wrote:
Hmmm...interesting...the other time someone posted something explicit
and someone replied to it and pointed it out, everyone joined in and
investigated it...this time the person who points it out gets
criticized...go figure...I always get the short end of the stick...
I
* Wouter Verhelst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 08:01:34AM +0200, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:55:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:59:21PM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
I hope this special treatment has nothing to do with the sun-ubuntu deal
announced a few days ago.
What relationship could you possibly suspect between this event and
processing of this package in Debian's queue/new?
--
- mdz
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
The difference would be that while you would act against the original
author's wishes if you were to put warez on your server, the same isn't
true about Sun Java. In fact, Sun explicitely asked us to please
distribute their
* Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Nathanael Nerode:
(2) Upstream status.
There hasn't been a new upstream for sysklogd since 2001.
All of the others are active upstream.
Have you checked if SuSE's syslog-ng is heavily patched? If it's
mostly alright, it's probably a good
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:39:47PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:35:41PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
You are told by a programmer that you are allowed to offer their
software on your server, but the programmer also tells you that his
statement is legally not
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dominic Hargreaves [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libgeo-postcode-perl
Version : 0.15
Upstream Author : William Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Geo-Postcode/
* License : Dual GPL/Artistic
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:39:47PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:35:41PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
You are told by a programmer that you are allowed to offer their
software on your server, but the programmer also tells you that his
statement is legally not
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:59:21PM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
I hope this special treatment has nothing to do with the sun-ubuntu deal
announced a few days ago.
What relationship could you possibly suspect between this event and
processing of this
Cade,
http://au.geocities.com/matriarch85106
Wilbert Dillon, Ref. qqz7978
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:47:01PM +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:
On Monday 22 May 2006 13:35, you wrote:
They won't sue us for distributing Java. If they do, all we have to do
is point the Judge to the press coverage of this change of license, and
to the fact that Debian was mentioned as one
Hi.
I reported [1] over a month ago, and also fixed it with some i18n on the side.
I've also looked at [2] and solved it, however packing some additional Perl
modules. I'm only a maintainer, my uploads being sponsored by David Moreno
Garza. How should I proceed in order to at least get [1] fixed
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 02:43:31PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Try as I might, and considering how lawyers and judges are human beings
and not automatons, I can't see any realistic scenario in which we could
be sued and lose
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 03:34:39PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
What, prey tell, does Debian do in relation to the non-free archive that
does not involve distributing?
Sorry for not being precise enough. I was talking about the indemnify
clause that worries me. And you cannot get rid of this
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 02:43:31PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Try as I might, and considering how lawyers and judges are human beings
and not automatons, I can't see any realistic
Josselin Mouette skrev:
They are the ones to tell other people what to do in general.
Uh, they do? I must have missed my list of assigned tasks from the
ftp-master team, then.
[...]
They are the ones preventing me from working on GNOME 2.14 because
packages are stuck in NEW.
Nobody is
On 22 May 2006, Juergen A. Erhard verbalised:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 03:55:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...] They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and
random opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
Wow, thanks for telling us. I thought the Debian developers elected
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 19 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
setools is in the list, and contains libraries that it uses
itself, but does not break it up into multiple installed
packages. Setools is moving rapidly
Juha These are different, why? According to man id id and id
Juha currently logged on user are the same.
The first one shows the groups that are assigned to the current
process, the second one shows the default list of groups the user will
get when logging in again.
Ach, I did not
Hello Wouter,
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 04:49:49PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 5/19/06, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why would they have to work with dash?
If the difference in speed is indeed that insane, that's nice.
I've received
Hi Eduard,
Am 2006-05-14 11:26:48, schrieb Eduard Bloch:
a) unbuildable
b) uninstallable
Only in the hands of unworthy[tm].
Not realy...
Right solution is to use pbuilder, which will:
a) always ensure that package can be built using unstable
b) keep your build environment clean
Am 2006-05-14 18:19:56, schrieb Carlo Segre:
even better, just put the pbuilder/result in a user-readable and writable
volume (/home/pbuilder for example) and run pbuilder as a normal user all
the time.
This is what I do.
Greetings
Michelle Konzack
--
Linux-User #280138 with the
Am 2006-05-14 23:08:09, schrieb Hamish Moffatt:
Without wishing to join the mob,
e) it's difficult to install versions of packages not available from
your regular sources.list. For example if you build a new (version of a)
library package and then an application that uses it and want to
Package: general
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
I wish we could stop shipping the Ruby bindings for libgtk1.2.
(libgtk1.2 being completely obsolete)
The rdepends show:
bee% apt-cache rdepends libgdk-imlib-ruby1.6 libgtk-ruby1.6 libglade-ruby1.6
libgdk-pixbuf-ruby1.6 libart-ruby1.6
On Monday 22 May 2006 06:56, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:47:01PM +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:
On Monday 22 May 2006 13:35, you wrote:
Try as I might, and considering how lawyers and judges are human beings
and not automatons, I can't see any realistic scenario in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Charles Fry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libcolt-java
Version :
Upstream Author : Wolfgang Hoschek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://dsd.lbl.gov/~hoschek/colt/
* License : BSD(ish) and LGPL
Programming Lang: Java
Hello,
this issue has been discussed some time ago:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/08/msg00299.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/08/msg00298.html
I would like to hear your current opinion about this topic. IMHO
removing a package should just work and currently this
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:51:21AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
And whether it's a democratic republic or some other form of hybrid
mostly depends on whether you consider ftp-master to be a delegate
position or a somewhat independent check, a question
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
By reading your email, I feel you are acknowledging the fact the
ftp-masters cabal (I can't name it otherwise after seeing their behavior
IRL) is treating other developers as second-class contributors who
should just do as they
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
I think that Policy 8.2 is fully applicable to your package then. It
is a MUST directive so your unwillingness to allow multiple versions
of your library to coexist does not affect the violation.
Juha Jäykkä wrote:
Hi!
I was digging around a problem with a user not being able to access his
cdrom even though the user belongs to group cdrom (as reported by groups
user) and the cdrom device is mode rw- group cdrom. It was immediately
clear this is a libnss-ldap issue, since the problem
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 04:48:50PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remember that for non-free, we provide no guarantee except for the
notice that we're allowed to distribute. We don't even guarantee that
some end-user might actually be legally allowed to
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 21 May 2006 23:25:28 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You're correct. So can you give reasonable and legitimate reasons why
one might not wish to follow the you must guidelines in this
instance?
Two, actually.
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 08:34:22AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
the project by not consulting you first is so much bullshit, because *they*
are the ones who bear the primary liability from distributing these
packages, and other developers (as opposed to mirror operators) bear none at
all.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 368511 gnome-ruby
Bug#368511: Removal of libgtk1.2 ruby bindings (meta-bug)
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `gnome-ruby'.
block 368511 by 368512
Bug#368511: Removal of libgtk1.2 ruby bindings (meta-bug)
Was not blocked by any bugs.
* Michael Prokop:
Using:
invoke-rc.d $PACKAGE stop || true
/etc/init.d/$PACKAGE stop || true
would be a replacement already used in some packages like for
example at, binfmt-support, dnsmasq, drbd0.7-utils, freeradius, hal,
scanlogd, sl-modem-daemon, snort.
I suppose it would be
On Sun, 21 May 2006 15:55:53 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
What is it, then?
A constitutional monarchy?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow stated:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
I think that Policy 8.2 is fully applicable to your package
then. It is a MUST directive so your unwillingness to allow
multiple versions of your library to
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 07:38:10AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
(...)
Issues: (1) Quality.
sysklogd has 105 open bugs: 3 important (1 with patch), 43 normal (11 with
patches), 11 minor (4 with patches), and 19 wishlist (some of which are
really quite important, such as 44523)
Please, when
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:09:31 +
Source: pptpd
Binary: bcrelay pptpd
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.3.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Rene Mayrhofer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Rene Mayrhofer [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 05:48:38 +
Source: scgi
Binary: libapache-mod-scgi libapache2-mod-scgi python2.4-scgi
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.10-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Neil Schemenauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 22:49:20 -0700
Source: qglviewer
Binary: libqglviewer1 libqglviewer-dev
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.4-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Andrew
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:21:07 +0200
Source: desktop-profiles
Binary: desktop-profiles
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.4.12
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Bart Cornelis (cobaco) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Bart
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 10:31:16 +0200
Source: motor
Binary: motor motor-fribidi motor-common
Architecture: source all i386
Version: 2:3.4.0-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Krzysztof Krzyzaniak (eloy) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:13:42 +0200
Source: logilab-astng
Binary: python-logilab-astng
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.16.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Sylvain Thenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Sylvain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 10:20:03 +0100
Source:
Binary:
Architecture: source powerpc
Version: 3.pre84-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 18:10:47 +0200
Source: pylint
Binary: pylint
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.11.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Sylvain Thenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Sylvain Thénault [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 12:20:03 +0200
Source: logilab-common
Binary: python-logilab-common
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.16.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Alexandre Fayolle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Sylvain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 03:33:03 +0200
Source: qbankmanager
Binary: qbankmanager
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.9.37-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Micha Lenk [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:04:21 +
Source: xen-tools
Binary: xen-tools
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.4-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Radu Spineanu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Steve Kemp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 10:08:25 +0200
Source: xcircuit
Binary: xcircuit
Architecture: source i386
Version: 3.6.24-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Michael Ablassmeier [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 22:16:07 +1000
Source: debsums
Binary: debsums
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.0.28
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Brendan O'Dea [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Brendan O'Dea [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:33:57 +0200
Source: gtksourceview
Binary: libgtksourceview-dev libgtksourceview-common libgtksourceview1.0-0
libgtksourceview-doc
Architecture: source all i386
Version: 1.6.1-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:18:06 +
Source: mlmmj
Binary: mlmmj-php-web mlmmj-php-web-admin mlmmj
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 1.2.11-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Søren Boll Overgaard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 21:57:31 -0400
Source: vim
Binary: vim-full vim-lesstif vim-common vim-gnome vim-doc vim-runtime vim
vim-gtk vim-perl vim-ruby vim-gui-common vim-tiny vim-python vim-tcl
Architecture: source all i386
Version:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 15:30:25 +0200
Source: rhythmbox
Binary: rhythmbox
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.9.4.1-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Loic Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Loic Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:03:24 +0200
Source: libavc1394
Binary: libavc1394-0 libavc1394-dev
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.5.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Kobras [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Daniel
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
