Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.13.0-5
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
@Loren As an sponsored maintainer and hence subscriber to this mailing list, I
think a subject line with a specific ticket number, package name and -- in the
particular case -- the acronym RFS would ease to follow up the progress of
your work. Ideally it were the template reaching level 4 / Find a
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.13.0-4
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.13.0-3
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.13.0-2
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
On Sat, 4 Nov 2023 19:02:02 +0100
Tobias Frost wrote:
> Am Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 11:55:29PM +0100 schrieb Norwid Behrnd:
>
> Your transitional package needs to Depends: on the new package.
>
Thank you for spotting my omission. The current upload to
https://mentors.debian.net/pack
> What is wrong with just adding mdl as a new binary package in the existing
> source package?
By the conventions of the Ruby team,[1] the name `ruby-mdl` conveys the idea
the binary provides only a library. For them, the binary however provides an
application conventionally named without the pr
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 10:34:22 +0200
Bastian Germann wrote:
> So, where is that mdl package that ruby-mdl depends on with the new version?
Following an advice by Antonio Terceiro,[1] the intention is dummy / transition
package ruby-mdl
https://mentors.debian.net/package/ruby-mdl/
https://mentors.
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mdl":
* Package name : mdl
Version : 0.13.0-1
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.13.0-1
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
> Oif, the man page itself shouldn't be renamed. As the executable in $PATH
> is "mdl", the man page should be named so.
There was the attempt to resolve the name issue by renaming the package.
Given the freeze a couple of days ahead, the suggest received however was to
defer this *for now*,[1] o
Postscript:
If you already edit `debian/changelog` (`UNRELEASED` -> `unstable`), the
trailing spaces in this file equally can be removed in the same session, too.
Hello Min Sun,
is there a particular reason why you opt for / stick to distribution
`UNRELEASED` for a package already monitored by the tracker?[1] It is the
entry e.g., `dch -i` puts into file `/debian/changelog` when you start to work
on a new version (increment) of a package. After all other
> So long for a library, change the name.
It might be better to rename the package after bookworm became stable.
My intent is to rename `ruby-mdl` into `markdownlint`; like
`posixsignalmanager`, it is a package accepted into `testing` a couple of
days ago. The recommendation I received was to st
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.12.0-3
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
Hello,
when packaging `markdownlint`[0] -- an application implemented in Ruby -- I
committed some errors. After provision of the source-only upload, and its
eventual transition as `ruby-mdl` into `testing`, it was time to improve this
package for a new upload,[1] "Upload #1" (uploaded by 2023-01-
Sorry, this was a misunderstanding on my side. In upload #3, with reference
to the documentation, the adjustment of the changelog and provision of the new
tag now are the only two intentional changes to the data.
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 20:30:44 +0100
Bastian Germann wrote:
> This is not a "Source only upload" as claimed by d/changelog.
>
The sequence of events here:
0) `dch -i` for an increment of the counter
1) change of the entry about maintainership in the /debian/control file
2) addition of two assist
Hello Mobin,
-- this is an off-list reply --
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 13:30:24 +0330
Mobin wrote:
> I send a new upload to mentors but seems like I do something "wrong". I
> think Debian BTS have a retitle system for bugs. No?
>
though I can't be a sponsor for your package (no working knowledge o
.
* Source only upload for migration to testing
Regards,
Norwid Behrnd
@Bastian
The point you addressed has been forwarded to the subscribers of the Debian
Ruby list. The root of the thread is
https://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/2023/01/msg00032.html
Regards,
Norwid
.
* Source only upload for migration to testing
Regards,
--
Norwid Behrnd
populate
```
http://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint/releases
```
(post-hoc) to eventually close the gap to package the project for Debian?
Regards,
--
Norwid Behrnd
e ist dieser Überblick auch für Sie interessant. In
diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen viel Erfolg, einen Sponsor zu finden um bald
`d11amp` im package tracker zu sehen.
Mit freundlichem Gruss,
Norwid Behrnd
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ruby-mdl":
* Package name : ruby-mdl
Version : 0.12.0-1
Upstream contact : ["p...@ipom.com"]
* URL : https://github.com/markdownlint/markdownlint
* License
The compilation on
https://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticPackagingTools
equally mentions `python3-stdeb`. Maybe this offers a working alternative to
pypi2deb.
Regards,
Norwid
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 21:51:22 +
Barry wrote:
> > On 2 Jan 2023, at 21:41, Danial Behzadi دانیال بهزادی
> > wro
26 matches
Mail list logo
