Bug#887659: RFS: urlwatch/2.7-1 [ITA]

Hi Paul, Thanks for your time reviewing my packages. I've tried to fix as much issues as I'm capable. Here is a list of changes I've applied to the new package : * Added missing build-dependencies * Wrapped-and-sorted debian directory files * Simplified debian/clean * Upgraded debian/compat to

Bug#887660: RFS: minidb/2.0.2-1 [ITP]

Hi Paul, Thanks for your time reviewing this package. I've tried to fix as much issues as I'm capable. Here is a list of changes I've applied on the new package : - Binary package renamed to python3-minidb - Switched to github orig.tar.gz to be consistent with debian/watch - Switched

Bug#886262: marked as done (RFS: xymonq/0.7-1 [ITP] -- query cli for Xymon)

Your message dated Fri, 9 Feb 2018 05:55:09 +0100 with message-id <20180209045509.fubdbjopg7mob...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#886262: RFS: xymonq/0.7-1 [ITP] -- query cli for Xymon has caused the Debian Bug report #886262, regarding RFS: xymonq/0.7-1 [ITP] -- query cli for Xymon to be

Re: compiled binary file in source package

Wookey writes: > Is it actually doing any harm? Does it get included in the package? > Does it get rebuilt? If it gets rebuilt then just remove it in the > clean rule. If it doesn't get included then you could just ignore > it. That's not sufficient. If a source package

Re: compiled binary file in source package

On 2018-02-08 23:46 +0100, David Rabel wrote: > Hi there, > > I am maintaining jugglinglab. The upstream source package contains a > compiled binary file. What is the cleanest solution to get rid of it? Is it actually doing any harm? Does it get included in the package? Does it get rebuilt? If

Re: compiled binary file in source package

David Rabel writes: > I am maintaining jugglinglab. The upstream source package contains a > compiled binary file. What is the cleanest solution to get rid of it? Is the compiled binary file generated entirely from sources that are all in the upstream source

piuparts - installation and purging test

Hi there, I am maintaining vim-lastplace. A few days ago I saw on my Debian Maintainer Dashboard that piuparts was failing at the installation and purging test. Today I wanted to fix this, but the message was gone. So piuparts now succeeds on piuparts.d.o . But when I run piuparts on my local

compiled binary file in source package

Hi there, I am maintaining jugglinglab. The upstream source package contains a compiled binary file. What is the cleanest solution to get rid of it? Story behind that: When I started packaging jugglinglab in 2016 I just deleted the file with a patch. This is unclean and for example sbuild

RFS: dxf2gcode/20170925-7

Hello Mentors, I'm looking for a sponsor/reviewer/mentor/uploader for my package dxf2gcode. This version is a very minor change, just noting in the debian/control Vcs-* fields that I moved the git repo to salsa. * Package name: dxf2gcode Version : 20170925-7 Upstream

Bug#889881: RFS: fcitx-configtool/0.4.10-1 -- graphic Fcitx configuration tool

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal X-Debbugs-CC: debian-input-met...@lists.debian.org Dear mentors and input-method team members, I am looking for a sponsor for package "fcitx-configtool" as part of the effort to update fcitx-related packages in Debian. * Package name: