Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-06 Thread Jens Peter Secher
On 11/6/12 5:13 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > a potential sponsor for reintroducing libpam-ssh asked me to contact you > as previous maintainer for comments on the reintroduction version, > which is meant to be a minimal version. > > A commented debdiff output is attached in such a way you can get qu

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-05 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear Jerome, - I would be much more comfortable if you asked the previous maintainer for comments on the ITP (even if he never answers!) - You could comment on #691988 explaining why you think the package should be accepted for Wheezy: +

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-03 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Le 02/11/2012 16:33, Jerome BENOIT a écrit : > Hello: > > On 31/10/12 14:36, Thibaut Paumard wrote: package > sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org > usertags 686070 - not-fit-for-wheezy thanks > > I'm removing the not

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-02 Thread Michael Gilbert
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote: >> I'm removing the not-fit-for-wheezy tag since Thomas claims to have >> improved on that matter. > > > It still have the tag `not-fit-for-wheezy'. This is more evidence that this tag doesn't actually provide anything useful. This package was

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-02 Thread Bart Martens
Hi Jerome, On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:33:06PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > On 31/10/12 14:36, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > >package sponsorship-requests > >user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org > >usertags 686070 - not-fit-for-wheezy > >thanks > > > >I'm removing the not-fit-for-wheezy tag si

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-11-02 Thread Jerome BENOIT
Hello: On 31/10/12 14:36, Thibaut Paumard wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 package sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usertags 686070 - not-fit-for-wheezy thanks I'm removing the not-fit-for-wheezy tag since Thomas claims to have improved o

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-10-31 Thread Jerome BENOIT
Hello, On 31/10/12 14:12, Thibaut Paumard wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 package sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usertags 686070 for-wheezy thanks Le 30/10/2012 21:21, Michael Gilbert a écrit : control: retitle -1 RFS: libpam-ssh/1.92

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-10-31 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 package sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usertags 686070 - not-fit-for-wheezy thanks I'm removing the not-fit-for-wheezy tag since Thomas claims to have improved on that matter. I don't have time to check the packa

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-10-31 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 package sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usertags 686070 for-wheezy thanks Le 30/10/2012 21:21, Michael Gilbert a écrit : > control: retitle -1 RFS: libpam-ssh/1.92-15 [ITP] [REINTRODUCTION] > > Unfortunately this

Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15

2012-10-30 Thread Michael Gilbert
control: retitle -1 RFS: libpam-ssh/1.92-15 [ITP] [REINTRODUCTION] Unfortunately this package was removed from unstable, so it won't be considered for upload until after wheezy unfreezes. Removing RC since as a NEW package the RC categorization does not apply. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCR