Bug#836709: RFS: 9wm/1.3.9-1 (For real this time)

Control: reopen -1 The upstream release issue has now been addressed. Apologies for posting this before it was ready but everything is good to go now To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm Alternatively,

Bug#836903: RFS: qevercloud/3.0.2+ds-1 [ITP] -- Unofficial Evernote Cloud API library for Qt

Hi Sean, 2016-09-11 5:46 GMT+08:00 Sean Whitton : > In that GitHub thread, there is mention of a parsing tool called > 'lemon'. Dmitry suggests packaging that separately, but you say it's > not necessary. Could you explain why? Where can I find out about that > tool?

Bug#832941: RFS: 4pane

control: tag -1 +moreinfo control: owner -1 ! Dear David, Thank you for your work to bring this new package to Debian! I can't sponsor the upload, but I hope this review is useful to you. I've split it into two sections: things that I would consider must-fixes before an upload to Debian, and

Re: git-import-orig: work around a .gitignore file ignoring debian/ ?

On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 23:53:40 +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote: > I maintain a package and the latest release tarball from source > unfortunately contains a .gitignore file listing debian/. I can't import > it in my git copy with "gbp import-orig --uscan" and patch it in > debian/patches afterwards,

git-import-orig: work around a .gitignore file ignoring debian/ ?

Hi, I maintain a package and the latest release tarball from source unfortunately contains a .gitignore file listing debian/. I can't import it in my git copy with "gbp import-orig --uscan" and patch it in debian/patches afterwards, since as soon as the new tarball would be imported, the whole

Bug#836903: RFS: qevercloud/3.0.2+ds-1 [ITP] -- Unofficial Evernote Cloud API library for Qt

Dear Boyuan, Dmitry, On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:52:29PM +0300, Dmitry Ivanov wrote: > I am the upstream developer of QEverCloud library. Sorry for the > interference, I'd just like to clarify a bit what QEverCloudGenerator > is and how it is intended to work. Please don't apologise -- there's a

Re: downtimed/1.0-1

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:10:27PM +0200, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: > I have a new version of downtimed ready for a review. > The package is uploaded to mentors[1]. > Please can someone review this package? Uploaded. It looks like regular sponsors rely on automation these days, and requests

Bug#834268: RFS: open-invaders/0.3-5 [NMU] [ITA]

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:59:46PM +0200, Hanno 'Rince' Wagner wrote: > I am packaging open-invaders, a clone of space invaders. I was able to > "port" it (with a lot of help from friends) to gcc-6, but I have a > problem with the used libraries. > > I am able to successfully compile and package

Bug#837196: marked as done (RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2)

Your message dated Sat, 10 Sep 2016 16:25:56 + (UTC) with message-id <2025308401.5083600.1473524756...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837196: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #837196, regarding RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2 to be marked as done. This

Bug#837319: Bug#837312: nmu: cdist_4.3.1-1

> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 05:09:20PM +0300, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > > Since not every sphinx reverse dependency which uses > > > ${sphinxdoc:Depends} (about 527 source packages in unstable according > > > to [1]) seems to have that rather strict dependency (thanks to Mattia > > > for pointing

Bug#837319: Bug#837311: cdist: FTBFS with some additional packages being installed: ImportError: No module named sphinx_rtd_theme

> our mails once again have crossed each other. :-) > > Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > > So please either drop the "(Closes: #837311)" from the changelog > > > completely or change it to "(Closes: #837312)". > > > > On mentors. > > Do you want me to upload this directly or do you want me to wait for >

Bug#837319: Bug#837311: cdist: FTBFS with some additional packages being installed: ImportError: No module named sphinx_rtd_theme

Hi Dmitry, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > Do you want me to upload this directly or do you want me to wait for > > the "Build-Conflics: python-sphinx" fix, too? > > Now, I think. After all, build conflicts is internal problem, and > uninstallable documentation is user-visible. Will do then. Thanks

Bug#837319: Bug#837311: cdist: FTBFS with some additional packages being installed: ImportError: No module named sphinx_rtd_theme

Hi Dmitry, our mails once again have crossed each other. :-) Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > So please either drop the "(Closes: #837311)" from the changelog > > completely or change it to "(Closes: #837312)". > > On mentors. Do you want me to upload this directly or do you want me to wait for the

Bug#837319: Bug#837312: nmu: cdist_4.3.1-1

Hi Dmitry, On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 05:09:20PM +0300, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > Since not every sphinx reverse dependency which uses > > ${sphinxdoc:Depends} (about 527 source packages in unstable according > > to [1]) seems to have that rather strict dependency (thanks to Mattia > > for pointing

Bug#837319: Bug#837311: cdist: FTBFS with some additional packages being installed: ImportError: No module named sphinx_rtd_theme

> But that also means that your upload at > http://mentors.debian.net/package/cdist will not fix this bug since > the bug is about a missing Build-Conflicts, not about the > uninstallability. The latter was just context on how I stumbled upon > that bug. #837312 is the actual uninstallability bug

Bug#837319: Bug#837312: nmu: cdist_4.3.1-1

> *sigh* I'd reopened and reassiged it if I were you. Not doing that now > myself because there is also a sponsorship request for cdist at > https://bugs.debian.org/837319 which will solve this anyways. > > Dmitry: Will have a look at #837319. :-) Fine. > > While on it I'd investigate why it

Bug#837319: Bug#837311: cdist: FTBFS with some additional packages being installed: ImportError: No module named sphinx_rtd_theme

Control: tag -1 + moreinfo unreproducible Control: severity -1 minor Hi Dmitry, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > cdist-doc depends on "sphinx-common (<< 1.4.5.0~), sphinx-common (>= > > 1.4.5)" via ${sphinxdoc:Depends}. While this is generally fine, it also > > means that cdist needs to be rebuilt

Bug#837319: Bug#837312: nmu: cdist_4.3.1-1

Hi, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 03:03:42PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > > cdist-doc depends on "sphinx-common (<< 1.4.5.0~), sphinx-common (>= > > 1.4.5)". This causes the following issues: > > > > * It's uninstallable in unstable > > * sphinx doesn't migrate to testing[0] >

Bug#837319: RFS: cdist/4.3.1-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cdist" * Package name: cdist Version : 4.3.1-2 Upstream Author : Nico Schottelius * Url :

Re: atomic_LIBS

On 09/10/2016 03:22 PM, Muri Nicanor wrote: > On 09/06/2016 12:44 PM, Christian Seiler wrote: > [...] >> I didn't think about adding -latomic to the linker flag list >> directly via -Wl. I just tested your suggestion and it's really >> funny; libtool does mangle your line and separate it into: >>

atomic_LIBS (was: FTBFS: how to test fixes)

hi, On 09/06/2016 12:44 PM, Christian Seiler wrote: [...] > I didn't think about adding -latomic to the linker flag list > directly via -Wl. I just tested your suggestion and it's really > funny; libtool does mangle your line and separate it into: > > -Wl,--push-state -Wl,--as-needed

Bug#827397: RFS: vlc/2.0.3-5+deb7u3

Dear LTS team, Mateusz: On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 09:12:47AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 06:53:49AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > (answering in general, not in this particular situation) > > > > > > >I've reviewed the upload, but I'm not sure if

Bug#837196: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2

Fully understand Gianfranco. thanks for the advice. The package has now been stripped of these dbg and symbols now and uploaded to mentors. Have done a test rebuild of the revised package together with a linitian -i -I of the sources and .deb packages and all looks as the same as the current

Bug#837196: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2

Hi, >I'm sure you remember - budgie-desktop is just very weird under debian & >ubuntu and the standard debhelper - all packages seem to be generated but the >desktop never >launches :/ yep I remember >I look forward to the future budgie-desktop where the maintainer is to recode >using C and

Bug#837196: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2

Hi Gianfranco, the debug packages and symbols are not currently being created since I am using the pre v9 packaging mechanism. I'm sure you remember - budgie-desktop is just very weird under debian & ubuntu and the standard debhelper - all packages seem to be generated but the desktop never

Bug#837196: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.6-2

control: owner -1 ! control: tags -1 moreinfo >- add debugging symbols packages why? they are autogenerated now https://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticDebugPackages other stuff seems good G.

Bug#837210: marked as done (RFS: lua-torch-torch7/0~20160908-ge5ebac6-1)

Your message dated Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:20:44 + (UTC) with message-id <586198311.4817837.1473499244...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837209: RFS: lua-torch-nn/0~20160908-g9d7b9ea+dfsg-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #837210, regarding RFS: lua-torch-torch7/0~20160908-ge5ebac6-1 to

Bug#837209: marked as done (RFS: lua-torch-nn/0~20160908-g9d7b9ea+dfsg-1)

Your message dated Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:20:44 + (UTC) with message-id <586198311.4817837.1473499244...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837209: RFS: lua-torch-nn/0~20160908-g9d7b9ea+dfsg-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #837209, regarding RFS: lua-torch-nn/0~20160908-g9d7b9ea+dfsg-1