Hello,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 05:06:29PM +0300, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>
> > 1. The /source/ package name should actually be undo-tree not
> >elpa-undo-tree (team convention to use upstream's name). Probably
> >not worth changing now, but you should be aware of this for packaging
> >
control: tag -1 +confirmed
Thanks for your response. I checked the new package and it looks good.
Nitpick only; fix at your discretion:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 03:41:52PM +0200, JCF Ploemen wrote:
> > > * Patches:
> > > + remove missing.diff, no longer needed.
> >
> > It would be good
It'd be available now: I didn't toggle the 'needs a sponsor?' option.
Control: owner -1 !
Control: tags -1 +moreinfo
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:05:54PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "arc-theme"
>
> * Package name: arc-theme
>Version : 20160605-1
Two minor issues:
W: arc-theme: description-synopsis-starts
Your message dated Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:28:26 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: growl-for-linux/0.8.5-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #827748,
regarding RFS: growl-for-linux/0.8.5-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this i
Control: owner -1 !
Control: tags -1 +moreinfo
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 08:18:12PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "moka-icon-theme"
>
> * Package name: moka-icon-theme
>Version : 5.3.2-1
>
> moka-icon-theme - Moka Icon Theme
First, p
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 03:00:05AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Looks good, uploaded.
One minor issue I noticed too late:
the Vcs-Browser field should point to a repository containing the Debian
packaging, rather than just the upstream code. The latter may be put into
debian/upstrea
Your message dated Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:56:12 +0200
with message-id <20160621025612.ga26...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#826986: RFS: faba-icon-theme/4.1.2-1 ITP
has caused the Debian Bug report #826986,
regarding RFS: faba-icon-theme/4.1.2-1 ITP
to be marked as done.
This means that you cl
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:38 AM, Roger Shimizu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna
> wrote:
>
>> 6) did you forward the rename to upstream?
>
> https://github.com/redjack/ipset/issues/41
Wait a minute, now I think your concern regarding renaming is right.
Consider
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 07:34:54PM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote:
> I've updated license in source code and
> also at github.com to match it, with "GPL v3 or higher".
Where may I get the updated package? I see nothing on mentors.debian.net.
> I'd update the man page with very few mathematical
Thank you both. I will try it out.
Greetings
Peter
On 06/20/2016 12:05 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
>> Get it fixed upstream.
>
>
> other than that, the manpage issue can be "probably" fixed by
> "PYTHONPATH=."
> before invoking help2man
>
> and of course using ./bin/codespel
Hi Harlan,
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 at 22:30:18 -0400, Harlan Lieberman-Berg wrote:
> Guilhem Moulin writes:
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lacme"
>
> This looks like a well-Debianized package to me.
> […]
> I also want to make you aware of the Let's Encrypt Debain Packaging
> Team, in
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 03:37:55PM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> > I've uploaded the package, thanks for your contribution to Debian :)
> Thank you! I guess I will ping you again when the package has been
> accepted, so that you can allow me to make further uploads as a DM,
> right?
OK.
On Monday, June 20 2016, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 04:58:32PM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> > The package generates quite a lot of lintian output:
>> >
>> > P: newlisp source: source-contains-prebuilt-java-object
>> > guiserver/guiserver.jar
>>
>> This file is
Your message dated Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:39:55 +0500
with message-id <20160620183955.gr15...@belkar.wrar.name>
and subject line Re: Bug#827333: RFS: newlisp/10.7.0-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #827333,
regarding RFS: newlisp/10.7.0-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Dear G,
Thanks for your review!
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna
wrote:
> control: owner -1 !
> control: tags -1 moreinfo
>
> Hi, lets see
>
> 1) control: why the -dev package is not multiarch?
> sounds like it is multiarch ready to me
> (I didn't check but include/* seems
Hi,
I've updated license in source code and
also at github.com to match it, with "GPL v3 or higher".
I'd update the man page with very few mathematical details (hope this
doesn't disturb the process).
Thank you.
Your message dated Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:20:20 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1026164991.10784021.1466443220878.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#827765: RFS: gdbm/1.12-2 ITP
has caused the Debian Bug report #827765,
regarding RFS: gdbm/1.12-2 ITP
to be marked as done.
This mean
Hi
>I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gdbm"
BTW not ITP :) (wrt message header)
sponsoring in a few seconds, with a change
s/UNRELEASED/experimental.
G.
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gdbm"
* Package name: gdbm
Version : 1.12-2
Upstream Author : bug-g...@gnu.org
* Url : http://directory.fsf.org/project/gdbm/
* Licenses: GFDL-1.3+, GPL-
> 1. The /source/ package name should actually be undo-tree not
>elpa-undo-tree (team convention to use upstream's name). Probably
>not worth changing now, but you should be aware of this for packaging
>other addons (you mentioned you wanted to package evil).
Ok. In self-protection c
control: tag -1 -moreinfo
> Here's a more complete review. I hope it is helpful to you.
Sure is, thanks!
> I ran debdiff and found that the new version installs
> /usr/share/xpad/help/xpad-user-help.txt. Shouldn't this be in
> /usr/share/doc/xpad? If xpad needs to load this file, you could
Hi,
>Corrected the dependencies in d/control
ack
>Made to create a makefile. :/
but why?
[Sergio Durigan Junion]
> metadata stuff
Sergio is correct, thanks!
anyway, it seems working, so please answer the above and I'll do the final
checks
and hopefully upload.
G.
Hi Roger
>Packaging another library (libipset) just takes some time.
I can understand that, and my review will probably take some more time :)
>Technically yes, but since it's a quite old version, I think nobody would do
>it.
>And currently "shadowsocks" is a python program in Debian archive, w
Hi,
>I am looking for a sponsor for my package "growl-for-linux"
LGTM
Uploaded.
G.
control: owner -1 !
control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi, lets see
1) control: why the -dev package is not multiarch?
sounds like it is multiarch ready to me
(I didn't check but include/* seems to have the same md5sum on different archs
2) the dev package should suggest the doc one
3) d/p/0002-fix-bu
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "growl-for-linux"
* Package name: growl-for-linux
Version : 0.8.5-1
Upstream Author : Yasuhiro Matsumoto
* URL : https://mattn.github.io/growl-for-linux/
* Lic
Your message dated Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:20:07 + (UTC)
with message-id
<2132665896.10382063.1466425207854.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#827736: RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-2 [RC]
has caused the Debian Bug report #827736,
regarding RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-2 [RC]
to be marked as do
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mpd-sima"
* Package name: mpd-sima
Version : 0.14.1-2
Upstream Author : Jack Kaliko
* URL : http://kaliko.me/code/mpd-sima/
* License : GPL3+
Hi,
Il Sabato 18 Giugno 2016 21:45, Frank Stähr ha scritto:
>I think we are nearly ready, don’t give up.
I *never* give up :)
>Nevertheless, I don’t see why e. g. boost/algorithm/string/trim.hpp is
>guaranteed to be installed. It might be a coincidence that it is
>included by regex or pro
Your message dated Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:48:18 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1604567679.10307054.1466419698699.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#820704: Bug#820705: RFS: subuser/0.5.6-3 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #820704,
regarding RFS: subuser/0.5.7-1 [ITP]
to be ma
Your message dated Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:48:18 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1604567679.10307054.1466419698699.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#820704: Bug#820705: RFS: subuser/0.5.6-3 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #820704,
regarding RFS: subuser/0.5.7-1 [ITP]
to be ma
Hi
>Get it fixed upstream.
other than that, the manpage issue can be "probably" fixed by
"PYTHONPATH=."
before invoking help2man
and of course using ./bin/codespell.py as argument
oh, and I think manpage generation should be done
in override_dh_installman, not dh_auto_build target.
so, so
* Peter Spiess-Knafl , 2016-06-20, 11:23:
2.) The script gets installed with the .py suffix, how can I drop this?
Get it fixed upstream.
--
Jakub Wilk
Hi Mentors!
I currently maintain codespell [1]. Upstream has dropped the makefile
support which has currently been used for packaging codespell.
Now I am trying to switch to pybuild but I am facing two problems:
1.) How can I invoke help2man in a pybuild based package?
2.) The script gets instal
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 07:55:34AM +0900, Sean Whitton wrote:
> As a member of the Emacs packaging team, I've had a look at this, and it
> seems fine. Thanks Dmitry.
In an attempt to improve the output of dh-make-elpa I'm looking at
Dmitry's package again, and I came up with the following
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 07:34:06AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 02:01:24PM +0900, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > I am looking for a sponsor for an NMU of muttprint, fixing a stretch RC
> > bug (older than 7 days and no maintainer activity). I use muttprint
>
> That is not corre
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hello again JCF,
Here's a more complete review. I hope it is helpful to you.
I ran debdiff and found that the new version installs
/usr/share/xpad/help/xpad-user-help.txt. Shouldn't this be in
/usr/share/doc/xpad? If xpad needs to load this file, you could make a
sym
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 08:00:20AM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> Hi Roberto,
>
> shouldn't the license be only GPL-3 instead of GPL-3+? At least the
> file headers and the website say so ..
As you're the sole author, I guess it'd be better to change the headers
instead, to say "version 3 or
39 matches
Mail list logo
