Hi,
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:05:14PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> Shorter summary of vote data goes as:
>>
>> cvs 5%
>> subversion9%
>> git-core 3%
>> mercurial 0.6%
>> darcs 0.3%
>> bzr 0.3%
>>
> Does monotone not get a mention? or w
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
>
> > Then you are voting for mercurial if you participated in popcon.
> >
> > vote: number of people who use this package regularly;
>
> Note that the vote is not that reliable either: it needs atime, which is
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package name: patman
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : Kay Pruefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Udo Stenzel <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
URL : http://bioinf.eva.mpg.de/patman/
License : GPL-2+
Prog
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:21:07PM -0300, Luciano Bello wrote:
> I was thinking about the Debian/OpenSSL debacle. Clearly it not easy to
> manage a hard meticulous QA process in all packages. In the other hand, there
> are packages more critical than others, which are more delicate to secur
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
> - It should be checked with debugging tools (like valgrind :P)
> - It should a public VCS
These should be encouraged, and in the cases where packages aren't in
a public VCS or QAed properly before upload, the deficiencies should
be politely pointed out
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 06:03:51PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> So, basically, I welcome your proposal, but IMO its simplest and most
> effective implementation would be: ``packages scoring high in popcon
> have to be maintained by teams using some Vcs-*''.
Why do you want to force the use o
Package: wnpp
Owner: Vincent Bernat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: shrewsoft-vpn-client
Version : 2.0.3
Upstream Author : Shrew Soft
* URL or Web page : http://shrew.net/?page=software
* License : other
Description : IPsec client including grap
Hi Michael,
Michael Meskes wrote:
> Sorry guys, apparently this email of mine didn't make it to the list.
> Thus sending it again. Need to figure out what's going on as this
> happened twice.
>
> Am Mittwoch, 21. Mai 2008 20:53:51 schrieb Joey Hess:
>> I'll no longer be maintaining the following
* Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'll no longer be maintaining the following packages. I plan to orphan
> them next week and hope to find new maintainers for them before then.
>
> rss2email
I'll take rss2email if no one else wants to.
--
David Watson - Debian GNU/Linux Developer
[EMAIL
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
El Vie 23 May 2008, Don Armstrong escribió:
> > - It should maintained by a team
>
> Team maintenance doesn't automatically make a package better.[1]
> Furthermore, I don't believe there are many (possibly any!) packages
> in Debian where the package is "important" and the current maintainer
> wou
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antony Gelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libdevel-calltrace-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Robert Spier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Jesse Vincent
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.or
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octav
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
> Is not about accept help. It about considering the package as
> unmaintained if there is not a team to maintain it. In same
> packages, we can not depend on only two pairs of eyes.
If there aren't enough people who are interested in maintaining
packages
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Octave Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[N.B.: This ITP was generated automatically from a template, even
though the DOG does intend to package the described software for
Debian. We apologize for the glitches in the text below.]
* Package name: octave
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's probably a good plan, especially since the sandbox is apparently
going to be eliminated eventually (and it sounds like arpack and delaunay
are on the list of things like
Le Sat, May 24, 2008 at 01:38:27AM +0100, Don Armstrong a écrit :
>
> We need the people who are doing the review and have continuously
> committed to doing the review before we block on the review.
Hi all,
peer-reviewed scientific research relies on intermediates to organise
the reviewing proce
retitle 472706 ITA: bdfresize -- Resize BDF Format Font
owner 472706 !
thanks
I'm going to adopt the bdfresize package. My packages bitmap-mule
and xfonts-jisx0213 depend on it.
Thanks,
--
Tatsuya Kinoshita
pgp9xcVzQmQxr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Saturday 24 May 2008, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
--cut--
> > Of course at first is not easy. But we should go to an scenario
> > where all the local patches was reported to upstream (to apply them
> > in the next release) or be justified by more than one dev
26 matches
Mail list logo
