Don Armstrong writes:
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2012, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> Would something as simple as "Requests for package review and
>> sponsorship" be appropriate?
>
> That's fine for me, assuming it's ok with everyone else.
It's fine for me as well.
Regards,
Ansgar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Mon, 23 Jan 2012, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Arno Töll wrote:
> >> Hence, please add a "sponsorship-requests" pseudo-package with
> >> debian-ment...@lists.debian.org as a package owner and we can get started.
>
> This
As for the usertag names, I came up with the following when writing
support for this into reportbug:
'new': "a sponsorship request for a brand new package",
'update': "a sponsorship request for an update to a
package you've gotten sponsored and uploaded previ
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Arno Töll wrote:
>> Hence, please add a "sponsorship-requests" pseudo-package with
>> debian-ment...@lists.debian.org as a package owner and we can get started.
This seems like a good name to me as well.
> I still need t
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Arno Töll wrote:
> Hence, please add a "sponsorship-requests" pseudo-package with
> debian-ment...@lists.debian.org as a package owner and we can get started.
I still need the text of the explanation of what the pseudopackage is
for. See http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Package: bugs.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
as we seem to have reached general consensus about the approach to
handle sponsor requests in the BTS. The last thing subject to discussion
is the name of the pseudo-package to agree upon.
Zack made
6 matches
Mail list logo
