You're welcome, let me know if there is anything else.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 March 2014 17:08:43 Sytse Sijbrandij wrote:
>> Responding here since I only just subscribed to the mailinglist.
>>
>> Did you know that we dropped pygments for highlight
On Tuesday 25 March 2014 17:08:43 Sytse Sijbrandij wrote:
> Responding here since I only just subscribed to the mailinglist.
>
> Did you know that we dropped pygments for highlight.js in our previous
> release?
No. This means that we need not to worry about the gitlab lexer.
Thanks for the heads
Hello
Sorry for the late reply, last week was vacation time.
On Monday 03 March 2014 23:17:22 Per Andersson wrote:
> My intention was to push this custom lexer upstream.
>
> https://github.com/tmm1/pygments.rb/pull/77
>
> Another way is of course to add this to the Debian pygments package (
Hi!
Nice that you picked up this work!
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Axel Wagner wrote:
> Hi Dominique,
>
> I think the open issues should be fixed now. Could you please have a
> look and upload if appropriate?
debian/rules: removal of bundled jquery.js is from obsolete -doc package,
update
On Friday 28 February 2014 14:59:55 Axel Wagner wrote:
> I think the open issues should be fixed now. Could you please have a
> look and upload if appropriate?
I had a quick look. There are still some issues:
control:
- you should put yourself in uploader
- update standards version to 3.9.5
cop
Hi Dominique,
I think the open issues should be fixed now. Could you please have a
look and upload if appropriate?
Best,
Axel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Sunday 23 February 2014 20:32:10 Axel Wagner wrote:
> I agree with Gergely Nagy, that this is a
> little bit puzzling, but warranted given that the gem is called that.
Agreed. Better stick with a consistent naming with respect to upstream gem
names. Even if the resulting name is lackluster.
W
Hi,
I'll hunt down proper licenses for these two files then.
>> • The ruby-pygments.rb thingy
This obviously wasn't really clear. I was refering to a comment in the
rejection notes about the name of the package (ruby-pygments.rb as
opposed to ruby-pygments). I agree with Gergely Nagy, that this
Hello Axel
Please keep the original debian bug in copy for reference
On Sunday 23 February 2014 02:42:45 you wrote:
> • vendor/custom_lexers/github.py has a bsd-license mentioned in the
> header, but there is no LICENSE file or verbatim license in the
> header. I read over several docs about the
9 matches
Mail list logo
