Bug#814662: marked as done (RFS: tweepy/3.5.0-1 [RC])

Your message dated Wed, 17 Feb 2016 04:37:06 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: tweepy/3.5.0-1 [RC] has caused the Debian Bug report #814662, regarding RFS: tweepy/3.5.0-1 [RC] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem

Bug#814956: RFS: paredit-el/24-1 [ITA] -- Emacs minor mode for structurally editing Lisp code

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my adoption of paredit-el. Paredit is an Emacs minor mode for editing LISP. It enforces consistency between opening and closing parentheses, and provides various commands for structurally editing code.

Re: Request for sponser

Hi, ITP is closed on upload accepted on unstable, while RFS is closed by the sponsor when the upload is performed. >Reallly!? But what about history? And how do we deal with 2 bug reports >then: we close ITP? I'm afraid I don't understand. I really thought the >bug needed to live its life until

Bug#814859: RFS: runescape/0.1-1 [ITP] -- Set in a fantasy world of war, landscapes and sinister powers

Hi, I have a few comments on this pavkage. Firstly although it's clear you've put some work into this, I'm not so sure packaging this client is that useful. I'm using Google Chrome, and going to www.runescape.com and clicking "Play Now" launches the client (through an external jar which

Re: Request for sponser

Hi, Le 16/02/2016 04:50, Adam Borowski a écrit : > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:00:24AM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: >> Could a mentor have a look on this RFS please? >> http://bugs.debian.org/722451 > > Why do you rename an ITP to RFS? Please file a separate bug. Reallly!? But what

Bug#814919: marked as done (RFS: opensmtpd/5.7.3p2-1 [RC] -- secure, reliable, lean, and easy-to configure SMTP server)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:52:38 +0100 with message-id <20160216175238.ga22...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#814919: RFS: opensmtpd/5.7.3p2-1 [RC] -- secure, reliable, lean, and easy-to configure SMTP server has caused the Debian Bug report #814919, regarding RFS:

Bug#797864: marked as done (RFS: eclipse-titan/5.4.1-1 [ITP] -- Compiler for TTCN-3 and for ASN.1)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:34:37 + with message-id <20160216173437.gc30...@chase.mapreri.org> and subject line Re: Bug#808141: sponsorship-requests: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package eclipse-titan. has caused the Debian Bug report #808141, regarding RFS:

Bug#794209: marked as done (RFS: eclipse-titan/5.4.1-1 [ITP] -- Compiler for TTCN-3 and for ASN.1)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:34:37 + with message-id <20160216173437.gc30...@chase.mapreri.org> and subject line Re: Bug#808141: sponsorship-requests: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package eclipse-titan. has caused the Debian Bug report #808141, regarding RFS:

Bug#808141: marked as done (RFS: eclipse-titan/5.4.1-1 [ITP] -- Compiler for TTCN-3 and for ASN.1)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:34:37 + with message-id <20160216173437.gc30...@chase.mapreri.org> and subject line Re: Bug#808141: sponsorship-requests: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package eclipse-titan. has caused the Debian Bug report #808141, regarding RFS:

Bug#804644: RFS: flashybrid/0.19 [ITA]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Control: noowner -1 Hi, almost two months have been passed, and I still don't see progresses

Bug#809449: marked as done (RFS: gsimplecal/2.0-2 [ITA])

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:58:32 +0100 with message-id <56c35538.4040...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#809449: RFS: gsimplecal/2.0-2 [ITA] has caused the Debian Bug report #809449, regarding RFS: gsimplecal/2.0-2 [ITA] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#799268: ITP missing for package python-ck with RFS 799268 with ITP in title

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, http://mentors.debian.net/package/python-ck did you look at the errors? please fix the ITP, and ping back when done. g. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWw1ShAAoJEPNPCXROn13ZkKoQANfTYuRseRA+p8vlDiGvdC9F

Bug#802902: marked as done (RFS: vconnectstand/20151108a-1 ITP)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:57:07 +0100 with message-id <56c354e3.9000...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#802902: RFS: vconnectstand/2.0.1 ITP has caused the Debian Bug report #802902, regarding RFS: vconnectstand/20151108a-1 ITP to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#802530: RFS [ITP]: node-ast-util/0.6.0-1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, ping g. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWw1PvAAoJEPNPCXROn13Z21wP/05wLUKPaAeoSLJSHmpqVJJD 9mG4YFF4W2oLGf9LHoD2zfWUgsUhMEGEav2ZWObehEWxFILqMfYrB2Lzk0OVXF+W

Bug#808546: marked as done (RFS: node-restore/0.3.0-1 [ITP] -- simple RemoteStorage server written in Node.js)

Your message dated Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:54:01 +0100 with message-id <56c35429.7050...@debian.org> and subject line closing has caused the Debian Bug report #808546, regarding RFS: node-restore/0.3.0-1 [ITP] -- simple RemoteStorage server written in Node.js to be marked as done. This means that

Bug#814921: RFS: sphde/1.1.0-1 [ITP] -- sphde -- Shared Persistent Heap Data Environment library

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sphde" Package name: sphde Version : 1.1.0-1 Upstream Author : SPHDE team URL : https://github.com/sphde/sphde License : EPL-1 Section : devel

Bug#814919: RFS: opensmtpd/5.7.3p2-1 [RC] -- secure, reliable, lean, and easy-to configure SMTP server

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Control: block 813398 by -1 Control: tags 813398 + pending Dear mentors, My key expired and so I'm looking for someone to sponsor "opensmtpd". (I've extended the expiry date on my key and uploaded it to keyring.d.o; I'm just waiting for it to

Re: Request for sponser

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 02:24:52PM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: > Le 16/02/2016 04:50, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:00:24AM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: > >> Could a mentor have a look on this RFS please? > >> http://bugs.debian.org/722451 > > > > Why do

Re: Request for sponsor

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:06:31AM +0100, Ksamak wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 04:50:18AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > * please build-depend on libjpeg-dev rather than libjpeg8-dev, while the > > latter exists in unstable we really don't want anything to depend on > > it in stretch > Ok,

Re: Request for sponsor

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 04:50:18AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > Wouldn't it be easier to start directly from Ubuntu packages instead of > outdated Knoppix ones? > It probably would, yes. We have the upstream version packaged, we just haven't run that many tests yet, that is why we chose to