On Wed, 2021-10-06 at 13:50 +0900, notebook wrote:
> When I asked for the package source back then, I was referred only to
> the debian tarball. I.e. I was not aware of anything else existing.
The package source and the upstream source are two different things.
When creating a fork of an existing
Thank you for the lot of input!
(I wish I had it a year ago when I started developing.).
Is there is a particular reason you used the Debian tarballs instead
of the old upstream CVS repository when creating the new upstream git
repository?
When I asked for the package source back then, I was
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:06 AM notebook wrote:
> I'm working on the "Gjiten" package ([1]). It was kind of abandoned and used
> Gtk2.
> I upgraded it to Gtk3 and did some further development on it (see [2]).
>
> I'd like to get the new codebase into the debian repos. If I understand
> correctly,
Hi,
I've deleted the previous superficial test.
A new version is on mentors.
Thanks for your patience.
Regards,
Maxime
On 5 October 2021 09:40:26 CEST, Jeroen Ploemen wrote:
>On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 21:19:28 +0200
>Maxime Werlen wrote:
>
>> Is it really interresting to keep such basic test ? It
[Geert Stappers]
Willing to sponsor gjiten
That would be awesomely awesome!
My hopes are, that if I get help the first one or two times, I'll get an easier
grasp on things and will be able to do it myself in near future.
[Matthew Fernandez]
the review process [...] surfaced many packaging is
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 08:27:37PM +0900, notebook wrote:
>
> > > > > As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
> > > > > maintainer(s) (though I see you already filed #982343).
> > > >
> > > > I contacted the current maintainers. They are too busy to do any work
> > >
> On Oct 5, 2021, at 03:27, Tobias Frost wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 06:35:34PM +0900, notebook wrote:
>>
[Me]
It looks like becoming a maintainer requires 40+ hours to go through all
the "must read" articles and becoming accustomed to every procedure and
guideline.
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xbyak":
* Package name: xbyak
Version : 6.00-1
Upstream Author : MITSUNARI Shigeo
* URL : https://github.com
As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
maintainer(s) (though I see you already filed #982343).
I contacted the current maintainers. They are too busy to do any work in this
regard.
Did you get any response?
Better question:
How were those contact attempts do
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 09:41:09AM +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 04:25:44PM +0900, notebook wrote:
> > Hello Andrey:
> >
> > Thank you for your reply!
> >
> > > As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
> > > maintainer(s) (though I
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 06:35:34PM +0900, notebook wrote:
>
> > > [Me]
> > > It looks like becoming a maintainer requires 40+ hours to go through all
> > > the "must read" articles and becoming accustomed to every procedure and
> > > guideline.
>
> > [Andrey]
> > Actually, even providing a source
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 06:35:34PM +0900, notebook wrote:
>
> > > [Me]
> > > It looks like becoming a maintainer requires 40+ hours to go through all
> > > the "must read" articles and becoming accustomed to every procedure and
> > > guideline.
>
> > [Andrey]
> > Actually, even providing a source
To all who have contributed to this bug report: Antonio, Bart, Gurkan,
Robin and Tobias
Thanks for your help and your patience as I have naively struggled to
comply with Debian standards. Apart from doc-base I think the package
is now fully compliant.
No sponsors have come forward. Please
[Me]
It looks like becoming a maintainer requires 40+ hours to go through all
the "must read" articles and becoming accustomed to every procedure and
guideline.
[Andrey]
Actually, even providing a source package for a one-time upload requires
that. Becoming a maintainer requires more, and is
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 06:20:11PM +0900, notebook wrote:
> > [Andrey Rahmatullin:]
> > If, on the other hand, you just want
> > that the package in Debian uses your updated code, you don't need to (and
> > can't) do anything in addition to what you already did.
>
> Just for future reference:
>
>
[Andrey Rahmatullin:]
If, on the other hand, you just want
that the package in Debian uses your updated code, you don't need to (and
can't) do anything in addition to what you already did.
Just for future reference:
"what you did" means
(1) Writing here in debian-mentors and hoping for some
On 2021-09-05 15:19:33 +1000, Jai Flack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What's the best place to put bundled Vim plugins now that vim82 has a
> new package system? From the documentation, /usr/share/vim/vim82/pack/
> is the global directory for such plugins (and I have confirmed it works
> correctly) however,
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 21:19:28 +0200
Maxime Werlen wrote:
> Is it really interresting to keep such basic test ? It doesn't test
> anything not already tested by upstream tests. Will it not be
> simpler to throw them away ?
In that case, doing away with this particular autopkgtest is indeed a
valid
Hi Chris,
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 04:25:44PM +0900, notebook wrote:
> Hello Andrey:
>
> Thank you for your reply!
>
> > As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
> > maintainer(s) (though I see you already filed #982343).
>
> I contacted the current maintainers. They
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 04:25:44PM +0900, notebook wrote:
> Hello Andrey:
>
> Thank you for your reply!
>
> > As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
> > maintainer(s) (though I see you already filed #982343).
>
> I contacted the current maintainers. They are too bus
Hello Andrey:
Thank you for your reply!
As the package is already in Debian, you need to contact its current
maintainer(s) (though I see you already filed #982343).
I contacted the current maintainers. They are too busy to do any work in this
regard.
So I guess whatever is in place must be r
Hello,
I'm working on the "Gjiten" package ([1]). It was kind of abandoned and used
Gtk2.
I upgraded it to Gtk3 and did some further development on it (see [2]).
I'd like to get the new codebase into the debian repos. If I understand
correctly, I need a sponsor for that(?) Is there anyone wil
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 03:58:16PM +0900, notebook wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> I'm working on the "Gjiten" package* ([1]). It was kind of abandoned and used
> Gtk2.
> I upgraded it to Gtk3 and did some further development on it (see [2]).
>
> I'd like to get the new codebase into the debian repos. If
23 matches
Mail list logo
