Re: RFS: scim-waitzar, libwaitzar (re-submission) Attn: Paul Wise

Ah, now we enter into the joyous legal details. I'll do my best to be as helpful as possible in this regard; please let me know if you need any clarifications. I only had to re-build one package this time: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scim-waitzar/ > Which fonts are these? I'm w

Re: RFS: dict-jargon (updated package)

Ruben Molina (17/01/2009): > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.4.7-1 of my package > "dict-jargon". Hello, only had a quick look since I'm missing time, but: - You want to say Build-Depends rather than Depends in the changelog. - You are *not* allowed to change past changelog en

Re: dpatch and .diff.gz files

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:26:33 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:01:16PM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit : > > Examine the ‘foo.diff.gz’ > > cat foo.diff.gz | lsdiff, for instance lsdiff -z foo.diff.gz | grep -v debian/ That's what I do :-) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer

RFS: ng-spice-rework (new package)

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ng-spice-rework" since my normal uploader is very busy these days. It has been uploaded once and rejected because of licensing issues but the troubled component has now been removed. Could someone upload it for me please. * Package name

Re: RFS: ng-spice-rework (new package)

On Sunday 18 January 2009 11:43:33 Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote: > Dear mentors, Hi Gudjon, > The package is more or less lintian clean :) What does that mean? You better describe what the problem is and find ways to deal with it properly. Uploading a *new* package with already known flaws, is no

Re: RFS: ng-spice-rework (new package)

Hi George and the others The lintian warnings are added below. > > The package is more or less lintian clean :) > > What does that mean? You better describe what the problem is and find ways > to deal with it properly. Uploading a *new* package with already known > flaws, is not the same as upload

Re: RFS: ng-spice-rework (new package)

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 11:44:28 +0100 "Gudjon I. Gudjonsson" wrote: > Hi George and the others > > The lintian warnings are added below. > > > The package is more or less lintian clean :) lintian is not a joke and -mentors is not here to be fobbed off when the real problem would appear to be a laz

Re: RFS: ng-spice-rework (new package)

Hello, On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:43:33AM +0100, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ng-spice-rework" since my normal > uploader is very busy these days. It has been uploaded once and rejected > because of licensing issues but the troubled component has now b

lintian and manpages - updated sponsoring requirements

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 11:06:48 + Neil Williams wrote: > lintian is not a joke and -mentors is not here to be fobbed off when > the real problem would appear to be a lazy maintainer. > Unacceptable. Write the manpages - no excuses. Write all the missing > manpages and make sure each one covers

Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

Not that much of a surprise or much of a burden really (using debconf correctly is a non-trivial task anyway) but, in line with my general work on translation support, TDebs and Emdebian locale repository infrastructure, I'm now going to require, for any package using debconf that requires sponsors

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sunday 18 January 2009, Neil Williams wrote about 'Added requirement for translation of debconf templates': >Every time the debconf templates change, I expect the RFS to include a >link to the call for translations sent to the debian-i18n mailing list >(use podebconf-report-po for that support

RFS: pidgin-osd

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pidgin-osd". * Package name: pidgin-osd Version : 0.1.0-1 Upstream Author :Maik Broemme * URL : * License : GPL3 Section : net It builds these binary packa

Re: RFS: pidgin-osd

Hi Michael Note: I'm not a Debian Developer, so I cannot sponsor your package. Thanks for your work! On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 04:25:07PM +0100, Michael Domann wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pidgin-osd". > > * Package name: pidgin-osd > Version

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

Hi. Le dimanche 18 janvier 2009 à 12:24 +, Neil Williams a écrit : > ... I'm now going to require, for any package > using debconf that requires sponsorship, that debconf translations are > requested and updated by the maintainer on an ongoing basis. You mean "that requires [my] sponsorship"

Re: RFS: pidgin-osd

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:57:23 +0100 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi Michael Hi Salvatore > > Note: I'm not a Debian Developer, so I cannot sponsor your package. > Thanks for your work! > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 04:25:07PM +0100, Michael Domann wrote: > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:37:20 +0100 Olivier Berger wrote: > Hi. > > Le dimanche 18 janvier 2009 à 12:24 +, Neil Williams a écrit : > > ... I'm now going to require, for any package > > using debconf that requires sponsorship, that debconf translations are > > requested and updated by the main

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sunday 18 January 2009 19:24:05 Neil Williams wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:37:20 +0100 > > Olivier Berger wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Le dimanche 18 janvier 2009 à 12:24 +, Neil Williams a écrit : > > > ... I'm now going to require, for any package > > > using debconf that requires sponsorshi

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 05:24:05PM +, Neil Williams wrote: > Olivier Berger wrote: > > > using debconf that requires sponsorship, that debconf translations are > > > requested and updated by the maintainer on an ongoing basis. > > You mean "that requires [my] sponsorship" ? ... > In most c

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 19:04:46 + Mark Brown wrote: > > In most cases, a rejection from one sponsor is taken into account by > > another, providing that the rejection is clearly explained and the > > steps required to resolve the problems are reasonable. > > I feel you may be being a little too

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:00:19 +0200 George Danchev wrote: > Everything you wrote makes a lot of sense and I think we should submit these > suggestons to Developers News at some point. > > One question remains though: how many translations we want in order to > qualify > a debconf-using packag

Re: RFS: dict-jargon (updated package)

Hi KiBi! Thanks for your comments :) El dom, 18-01-2009 a las 10:04 +0100, Cyril Brulebois escribió: > Ruben Molina (17/01/2009): > > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.4.7-1 of my package > > "dict-jargon". > - You want to say Build-Depends rather than Depends in the changelog. In

RFS: commons-javaflow [2nd try]

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "commons-javaflow" which is needed for JasperReports (ITP #281346) itself needed for Spring Framework (ITP #426259). If you intend to sponsor this upload you should also sponsor the commons-jci one (commons-javaflow need commons-jci). *

RFS: commons-jci [2nd try]

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "commons-jci" which is needed for JasperReports (ITP #281346) itself needed for Spring Framework (ITP #426259). * Package name: commons-jci Version : 1.0-1 Upstream Author : Torsten Curdt * URL : http://commons.

RFS: velocity-tools [2nd try]

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "velocity-tools" which is needed for JasperReports (ITP #281346) itself needed for Spring Framework (ITP #426259). * Package name: velocity-tools Version : 1.4-1 Upstream Author : Apache Software Foundation * URL

RFS: webcpp (bug fix)

Hi Sandro webcpp/0.8.4-9 (and -8) is a FTBFS bugfix for porting to kFreeBSD and would close #511427. I've also improved the packaging in -8 and a little further in -9. The updated libtools are a dpatch rather than direct changes, since it's silly to mix the two, but that means its pretty big. It

RFS: tiles [2nd try]

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "tiles" which is needed for JasperReports (ITP #281346) itself needed for Spring Framework (ITP #426259). * Package name: tiles Version : 2.0.6-1 Upstream Author : Apache Software Foundation * URL : http://tiles.

Re RFS: pidgin-osd

Hey there, having a quick look at your package. From a first glance, you need to clean up your rules file, get rid of all the comments that are meant as a guideline to the packager. You've put in the bits it's asking for, they're just placeholders. Also, you don't need < and > around everything

Re: Re RFS: pidgin-osd

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:17:08AM +, Martin Meredith wrote: > Hey there, having a quick look at your package. > > From a first glance, you need to clean up your rules file, get rid of all the > comments that are meant as a guideline to the packager. You've put in the > bits > it's asking f

Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

Howdy all, I see a conflict in the workflow of bug fixing and packaging. I'd like to know that I'm wrong, or that I'm right but there is a way to get around it. As I understand it, the following facts hold: * When a bug is fixed in a new release, recommended practice is to put a “Closes: bug#N

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

Hello, On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Ben Finney wrote: > * When packages are created by ‘dpkg-buildpackage’, the ‘*_changes’ > files by default contain only changes from the latest entry in the > changelog. By default, yes. However, there is the "-vmmm.nnn-qqq" option which makes the changelog of all

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

Ben Finney writes: > I never invoke ‘dpkg-genchanges’ manually; that's done by > ‘dpkg-buildpackage’, which in turn is usually invoked by something else > (e.g. ‘pbuilder’ or ‘bzr-buildpackage’ etc.) Is there a normal way to > have ‘dpkg-genchanges’ always understand “include all entries newer >

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

Hi Neil, One concern I have with your proposal/personal requirement is that: a) it depends on the time and availability of translators, and b) [ITP-only] it means that if a package is not in shape, doesn't fit in Debian, or there's any reason not to include it in the archive it would mean wasted

RFS: libqrupdate

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libqrupdate". Package name: libqrupdate Version : 1.0-1 Upstream Author : Jaroslav Hájek URL : http://qrupdate.sf.net License : GPLv3 Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libq

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

On 2009-01-19, Ben Finney wrote: > * When fixing bugs that prevented a previous release (e.g. one made to > mentors.debian.net) from making it into Debian (e.g. because the > sponsor requires further changes), recommended practice is to > increment the release number and make a new changelog

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

Russ Allbery writes: > Ben Finney writes: > > > I never invoke ‘dpkg-genchanges’ manually; that's done by > > ‘dpkg-buildpackage’, which in turn is usually invoked by something else > > (e.g. ‘pbuilder’ or ‘bzr-buildpackage’ etc.) Is there a normal way to > > have ‘dpkg-genchanges’ always under

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > Okay. So is there a normal way to have the '-v' option during a run > set to "include all entries newer than what's currently in Debian"? > Or do I have to remember to set it manually each time I add a new > release and build? Maybe add some s

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

Ben Finney writes: > Okay. So is there a normal way to have the ‘-v’ option during a run set > to “include all entries newer than what's currently in Debian”? Or do > I have to remember to set it manually each time I add a new release and > build? I have to look it up for my packages, but you c

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

"Paul Wise" writes: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Ben Finney > wrote: > > > Okay. So is there a normal way to have the '-v' option during a > > run set to "include all entries newer than what's currently in > > Debian"? Or do I have to remember to set it manually each time I > > add a new

Re: Closing bugs, incrementing release number, and uploads to mentors.debian.net

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Ben Finney wrote: >> usually you would remember because you'd debdiff and interdiff >> against the .deb and .diff.gz in the archive. > > How will those help me to get information about the package I'm about > to build *before* issuing the commands to build it? As