Bug#825302: RFS: usbguard/0.4-2 [ITP]

Control: severity -1 wishlist Control: block 791919 by -1 Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi, On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 21:10 +0200, Muri Nicanor wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usbguard" This looks like quite an

Bug#825302: RFS: usbguard/0.4-2 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usbguard" * Package name: usbguard Version : 0.4-2 Upstream Author : Daniel Kopeček * URL : https://github.com/dkopecek/usbguard * License

Bug#822856: Another try for dvtm?

> Hi Dmitry, due to the partial orphaning of the package in #824284, > are you interested in this package, and starting to maintain it properly? Last version is on mentors. I think it is okay to upload, the only thing I am not sure is about close-multiple-bug syntax. -- Accept: text/plain,

Re: Bug#825236: RFS: openfst/1.5.3-1 -- weighted finite-state transducers library

On 25/05/2016 13:22, Jakub Wilk wrote: > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > * Giulio Paci , 2016-05-24, 23:38: >> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/openfst.git > > The package FTBFS (on i386): > > | Making check in test > | make[3]: Entering directory

Bug#822856: Another try for dvtm?

and with #825269 there is also an O: bug :) (thanks Mattia for the ping about it) G. Il Mercoledì 25 Maggio 2016 13:18, Gianfranco Costamagna ha scritto: Hi Dmitry, due to the partial orphaning of the package in #824284, are you interested in this package, and

Bug#825236: RFS: openfst/1.5.3-1 -- weighted finite-state transducers library

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo * Giulio Paci , 2016-05-24, 23:38: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/openfst.git The package FTBFS (on i386): | Making check in test | make[3]: Entering directory '/build/openfst-aOvp6g/openfst-1.5.3/src/test' | /usr/bin/make

Bug#822856: Another try for dvtm?

Hi Dmitry, due to the partial orphaning of the package in #824284, are you interested in this package, and starting to maintain it properly? I think now can can proceed with this RFS :) let me know what is your best plan, thanks Gianfranco

Bug#825237: RFS: mrpt/1:1.4.0-1 [ITA] [RC]

Dear Sean, Thank you very much for the review, indeed any help is appreciated! > You should drop the libmrpt-dbg package, since we now have automatic > *-dbgsym binary package generation. Done (upstream). I wasn't aware of this change. In the past, I provided -dbg packages with a totally