Bug#844765: RFS: gitless/0.8.4-1 -- new package

Peter Pentchev writes: > I am looking for a sponsor for the initial upload of my package > "gitless" - a version control system on top of Git. Would you like to conform to the Python Application Packaging Team

Re: Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

Hi lumin, 2016-12-02 14:36 GMT-02:00 lumin : > Hi mentors, > > I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when > the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. > > I'm maintaining a package named "Caffe". I migrated the same > source from experimental to unstable, and

Bug#844765: RFS: gitless/0.8.4-1 -- new package

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:15:20PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for the initial upload of my package > "gitless" - a version control system on top of Git. > > * Package name: gitless >

Re: Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

On 02/12/16 18:11, Jérémy Lal wrote: 2016-12-02 18:08 GMT+01:00 Ghislain Vaillant : On 02/12/16 16:36, lumin wrote: Hi mentors, I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. I'm maintaining a package named "Caffe". I

Bug#846618: marked as done (RFS: khard/0.11.3-1)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 18:12:49 + (UTC) with message-id <1450475851.8937504.1480702369...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846618: RFS: khard/0.11.3-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #846618, regarding RFS: khard/0.11.3-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Re: Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

Hi, >I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when >the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. maintaining symbols on C++ projects is a nightmare. and do subsequent uploads is done also by qt* folks (see e.g. qtbase uploads). You can consider however some things, e.g. marking

Bug#846618: RFS: khard/0.11.3-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "khard": khard - address book for the Linux console Package: khard Version: 0.11.3-1 Upstream Author: Eric Scheibler Homepage: https://github.com/scheibler/khard

Re: Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

2016-12-02 18:08 GMT+01:00 Ghislain Vaillant : > On 02/12/16 16:36, lumin wrote: >> >> Hi mentors, >> >> I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when >> the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. >> >> I'm maintaining a package named "Caffe". I migrated the same >>

Re: Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

On 02/12/16 16:36, lumin wrote: Hi mentors, I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. I'm maintaining a package named "Caffe". I migrated the same source from experimental to unstable, and it FTBFS'ed as you see at [0], due to the

Maintaining C++ library symbols control file with unstable mangled symbols

Hi mentors, I need advise on the way maintaining symbols control file when the mangled C++ symbols are unstable. I'm maintaining a package named "Caffe". I migrated the same source from experimental to unstable, and it FTBFS'ed as you see at [0], due to the mangled C++ symbols change. Actually

Bug#846610: marked as done (RFS: asl/0.1.7-2)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 15:57:25 + (UTC) with message-id <322161687.8763792.1480694245...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846610: RFS: asl/0.1.7-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846610, regarding RFS: asl/0.1.7-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#846610: RFS: asl/0.1.7-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "asl" * Package name: asl Version : 0.1.7-2 Upstream Author : Avtech Scientific * URL : http://asl.org.il * License : AGPL-3

Bug#846603: marked as done (RFS: patat/0.4.4.0-1)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:53:47 + (UTC) with message-id <602400637.8665434.1480690427...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846603: RFS: patat/0.4.4.0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #846603, regarding RFS: patat/0.4.4.0-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#846603: RFS: patat/0.4.4.0-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "patat": patat - Terminal-based presentations using Pandoc Package: patat Version: 0.4.4.0-1 Upstream Author: Jasper Van der Jeugt Homepage:

Bug#846480: marked as done (RFS: mailfilter/0.8.6-2)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:10:37 + (UTC) with message-id <1107681692.8726120.1480687837...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846480: RFS: mailfilter/0.8.6-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846480, regarding RFS: mailfilter/0.8.6-2 to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#846546: marked as done (RFS: ora2pg/17.6-1 [RC] [QA])

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:05:50 + (UTC) with message-id <1875348817.8568870.1480687550...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846546: RFS: ora2pg/17.6-1 [RC] [QA] has caused the Debian Bug report #846546, regarding RFS: ora2pg/17.6-1 [RC] [QA] to be marked as done. This means

Bug#846511: marked as done (RFS: pentobi/12.1-1)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:08:19 + (UTC) with message-id <1050257123.8670560.1480687699...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846511: RFS: pentobi/12.1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #846511, regarding RFS: pentobi/12.1-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#846553: marked as done (RFS: dvtm/0.15-2 )

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 14:01:51 + (UTC) with message-id <1173747559.8582569.1480687311...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846553: RFS: dvtm/0.15-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846553, regarding RFS: dvtm/0.15-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#846594: marked as done (RFS: dcm2niix/1.0.20161101-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:46:27 + (UTC) with message-id <1347617402.8610279.1480686387...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846594: RFS: dcm2niix/1.0.20161101-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #846594, regarding RFS: dcm2niix/1.0.20161101-1 [ITP] to be marked as done.

Bug#846592: marked as done (RFS: shark/3.1.3+ds1-2)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:41:21 + (UTC) with message-id <1705993272.8567794.1480686081...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846592: RFS: shark/3.1.3+ds1-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846592, regarding RFS: shark/3.1.3+ds1-2 to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#846596: marked as done (RFS: patat/0.4.3.0-1)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:40:06 + (UTC) with message-id <138482470.8558326.1480686006...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846596: RFS: patat/0.4.3.0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #846596, regarding RFS: patat/0.4.3.0-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#846593: marked as done (RFS: pybind11/1.8.1-2)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:42:31 + (UTC) with message-id <35955162.8617323.1480686151...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846593: RFS: pybind11/1.8.1-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846593, regarding RFS: pybind11/1.8.1-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#846190: marked as done (RFS: openldap/2.4.44+dfsg-2 [RC])

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:38:10 + (UTC) with message-id <845060485.8581374.1480685890...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846190: RFS: openldap/2.4.44+dfsg-2 [RC] has caused the Debian Bug report #846190, regarding RFS: openldap/2.4.44+dfsg-2 [RC] to be marked as done.

Bug#846596: RFS: patat/0.4.3.0-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "patat": patat - Terminal-based presentations using Pandoc Package: patat Version: 0.4.3.0-1 Upstream Author: Jasper Van der Jeugt Homepage:

Bug#846190: RFS: openldap/2.4.44+dfsg-2 [RC]

On 2 December 2016 at 14:12, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > let me know if you intend to sponsor this, otherwise I can do the upload in a > few minutes > thanks! > Please go ahead, since I'm leaving right now for the weekend and I will not have access to any devel

Bug#846190: RFS: openldap/2.4.44+dfsg-2 [RC]

Hi, >https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/openldap/openldap_2.4.44+dfsg.orig.tar.gz >failed usually this is not needed, since I presume you will do a diff between the current version in unstable and the one on mentors pull-debian-source openldap dget -u mentors-url.dsc debdiff of

Bug#846594: RFS: dcm2niix/1.0.20161101-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dcm2niix" * Package name: dcm2niix Version : 1.0.20161101-1 Upstream Author : Chris Rorden * URL : https://github.com/rordenlab/dcm2niix * License : BSD

Bug#846593: RFS: pybind11/1.8.1-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pybind11" * Package name: pybind11 Version : 1.8.1-2 Upstream Author : Wenzel Jakob * URL : https://github.com/pybind/pybind11 * License

Bug#846592: RFS: shark/3.1.3+ds1-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "shark" * Package name: shark Version : 3.1.3+ds1-2 Upstream Author : Christian Igel * URL : http://image.diku.dk/shark/ * License : LGPL-3

Bug#846556: marked as done (RFS: h5py/2.6.0-2)

Your message dated Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:44:36 + (UTC) with message-id <2028298805.8435083.1480679076...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#846556: RFS: h5py/2.6.0-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #846556, regarding RFS: h5py/2.6.0-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Looking for new maintainer(s) for net-snmp

Hello everybody, the net-snmp source package is looking for a new maintainer: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835654 It is currently affected by 3 release critical bugs and has many reverse dependencies so it really needs to be well maintained. Uptsream seems to be reasonably

Bug#846348: ITP: capstone -- lightweight multi-architecture disassembly framework

Hello Pranith, On Wed, 30 Nov 2016, Pranith Kumar wrote: > Package: wnpp > > * Package name: capstone > Version : 4.0 > Upstream Author : Nguyen Anh Quynh > * URL : http://www.capstone-engine.org/ it looks like you are a bit confused. capstone is

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 09:08:51AM +0100, Olivier Sallou wrote: > >> As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the > >> published repo. > >> The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* > >> tags are not its descendants. This will not work

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On 12/01/2016 04:36 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:21:32PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: >> As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the >> published repo. >> The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* >> tags are