On 23/01/2009, at 08.00, Jordan Mantha wrote:
> Is there an easy way that we can include a description of packages in
> the REVU emails? I really like seeing what's new from REVU but I'm
> always a little disappointed when I look at the email and I can't find
> any idea of what the package is. Eve
On 19/10/2008, at 00.25, Caroline Ford wrote:
> Having them in malone makes them easier to link to the Debian request
> - and we can see if the status changes in the Debian bug. This means
> it is easier to see if the request has been satisfied.
Agreed. We have our stuff scattered all over the In
On 23/01/2009, at 00.30, Nathan Handler wrote:
> For those of you who might be unaware, I have taken over Siegfried
> Gevatter's (RainCT) role of REVU Coordinator. For the past few days, I
> have been thinking about something, and I want to get the opinions of
> the rest of the people in the commu
MOTU,
In a recent email, Morten suggested he'd bring an item to the next
MOTU Meeting. Curious when that might be, I checked the wiki page (1),
and discovered that we haven't planned one since November. To better
facilitate Morten's plan, I'm unilaterally declaring the next MOTU
Meeting to be
Hi,
On Friday 23 January 2009 01:31:42 Loïc Martin wrote:
> Nathan Handler wrote:
[..]
>
> What happens when lintian (or another automated check) throws an error,
> but that error is not justified? I've seen the case for all cdemu
> related packages (for example
> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/detail
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:04:34 +0100 Kjeldgaard Morten
wrote:
>On 23/01/2009, at 08.00, Jordan Mantha wrote:
>
>> Is there an easy way that we can include a description of packages in
>> the REVU emails? I really like seeing what's new from REVU but I'm
>> always a little disappointed when I look a
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:49:56 +0100 Kjeldgaard Morten
wrote:
>On 23/01/2009, at 00.30, Nathan Handler wrote:
>
>> For those of you who might be unaware, I have taken over Siegfried
>> Gevatter's (RainCT) role of REVU Coordinator. For the past few days, I
>> have been thinking about something, and
Refdoc wrote:
> I am one of the developers at CrossWire. Several of our programmes are
> in your repository, but they are ancient, often 2 or more releases
> behind us.
Hi,
I haven't contributed anything to Ubuntu before (besides a few bug
reports) but I'd be willing to "maintain" packaging of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
NEW: rand_1.0.3.orig.tar.gz
NEW: rand_1.0.3-0ubuntu1.diff.gz
NEW: rand_1.0.3-0ubuntu1.dsc
rand (1.0.3-0ubuntu1) jaunty; urgency=low
* Initial release.(LP: #303812)
Your package contains new components which requires manual editing of
the over
Hello
May I ask you to upgrade tex4ht for Hardy? It contains various
improvements, such as
- simple support of the impress format for presentation.
- support of the covington style for producing linguistic interline
translations.
- improved support for tables, (math in tab
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:49 AM, Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
> On 23/01/2009, at 00.30, Nathan Handler wrote:
>
>> For those of you who might be unaware, I have taken over Siegfried
>> Gevatter's (RainCT) role of REVU Coordinator. For the past few days, I
>> have been thinking about something, and I
[2009/1/23 Loïc Martin ]
Just some comments:
> 1. debian/control
> - wrong priority;
How can this be determined? Priority "extra" is not always (although
very often) wrong.
> - maintainer field not assigned to MOTU, packager email need to be moved
> to XSBC-Original-Maintainer;
I think REVU al
Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
> I am not sure that more automated package analysis well help much. The
> uploaders already have Lintian and other tools at their disposal, yet
> the fact is that many packages have lots of Lintian issues remaining
> on the binary packages.
Except for linitan errors
Hello Norbert, I will be willing to work with you on this project. Join
#ubuntu-motu on the Freenode IRC network sometime and search for "Chris`".
>From what I've seen, the packaging (of the older versions) is a bit more
advanced than some of my other packages but I will be willing to contribute
to
Hello!
Forwarding this back to ubuntu-motu. The current maintainer of these
packages in Debian is willing to continue to work and would love to
co-maintain them as a team. Chris and Norbert I think you are interested.
Dima
Original Message
Subject: Re: Gnomesword, libsword, dia
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 09:28:05PM +0100, Siegfried Gevatter (RainCT) wrote:
> Was there any further discussion on this which I missed, or has
> discussion stalled?
There was some discussion about this at UDS 9.04 and it resulted in a
specification[1] for handling needs-packaging bug reports.
A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
NEW: charm_1.9.1.orig.tar.gz
NEW: charm_1.9.1-0ubuntu1.diff.gz
NEW: charm_1.9.1-0ubuntu1.dsc
charm (1.9.1-0ubuntu1) jaunty; urgency=low
* Initial release (LP: #297054)
http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=charm
- --
. ''`. Luca Fal
Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Hello
>
> May I ask you to upgrade tex4ht for Hardy? It contains various
> improvements, such as
>
> - simple support of the impress format for presentation.
>
> - support of the covington style for producing linguistic interline
>translations.
>
> - i
Siegfried Gevatter (RainCT) wrote:
> [2009/1/23 Loïc Martin ]
>
> Just some comments:
>
>> 1. debian/control
>> - wrong priority;
>
> How can this be determined? Priority "extra" is not always (although
> very often) wrong.
Indeed, it's not always wrong, but it can be suggested the uploader
che
2009/1/23 Loïc Martin :
> I don't know either ;) but REVU could check debian/rules and see if
> manpages are installed, check the different ways they get installed
> (depending on the tool used to build the package). The uploader can
> comment if REVU doesn't spot them, but I'm not sure there's so
Loïc, Nathan,
It is in principle possible to transform REVU into a super-
sophisticated package-analysis machine that would extend Lintian's
capabilities and it is even in principle possible that virtually error-
free packages would result.
The point is, it doesn't solve our problem, because
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
> The point is, it doesn't solve our problem, because at some point, a
> human being needs to have a look at the package. Even if all packages
> were perfect, we still could not handle one review plus an upload with
> the current activity o
On 23/01/2009, at 18.17, Jordan Mantha wrote:
... a long post with points that I agree with and others that I don't.
A very good outset for discussion! Just a short comment on one of
your points, Jordan:
> 1) New contributors are not to be encouraged to package from scratch.
> If somebody wa
On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
> I have now produced a draft page at
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GettingStartedDraft
> , incorporating all ideas contributed to me (the number is zero ;-)).
Hi Morten,
Thanks for working on this, I think the page is great.
I'm not su
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:51:41 -0600 Nathan Handler
wrote:
>I can not speak for other MOTUs, but when I review a package on REVU,
>I normally subscribe to it. That way, I can review it again once a new
>version is uploaded.
There are other MOTU that think it's good to get review on a variety of
p
Hello!
I have been maintainining the FreeNX complete suite for at least 2 years
and now I uploaded it to revu.
New packages:
- http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=nxagent
- http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=nx-x11
- http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=nxcompext
I was unaware that a free nx-server edition existed. :) I love NOMachine and
look forward to a native package in universe.
~Dereck
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Marcelo Boveto Shima <
marcelosh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have been maintainining the FreeNX complete suite for at leas
27 matches
Mail list logo
