Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> program called xplot. Consider using the alternatives system for that.
> You'll need to coordinate with the maintainer of the other xplot package
> for that to work.
That sounds ugly though - having an alternative for something that does
entirely different stuff. Isn't it
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 07:06:23PM -0700, Vikram wrote:
>
> If you are too busy for this I still offer to look into packaging tcptrace
> with xplot.
If you want to go ahead and package xplot, please do. You'll need to
handle the fact that we've already got an xplot package that installs a
progra
Hi,
I had mailed you earlier [cc'ed debian-devel too] , dont know if you
remember. I had packaged the tcptrace debs sometime back as I wanted to
use it for applying to be a debian maintainer but you told me you were
working on it and intended to complete it in the near future.
If you are too b
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 08:30:13PM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> #89421 tcptrace filed: 531, changed 531
This was mine, and I do still intend to package it. The issue that
prevented me from doing so was that it wants to use another software
package called xplot, wr
* Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-26 23:43]:
> > The changed date is clearly wrong. I suggest you redo your stats and
> > post an updated list.
>
> and please include the email address of the reporter for better grepping.
Plus the one who did the last modification. (Image an RFP whi
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 11:11:03PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> The changed date is clearly wrong. I suggest you redo your stats and
> post an updated list.
and please include the email address of the reporter for better grepping.
Greetings
Bernd
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Below's a list of the bug tahtw will be renamed. The "filed" and
> "changed" fields in the list are the number of days that have past since
> the bug was opened, and since any addition was made to the report,
> respectively.
> #85612 mixmaster
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 03:05:35PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > > #87667 gstreamerfiled: 546, changed 546
> >
> > As an example, this package was uploaded to experimental on friday,
> > and has been packaged upstream for about a year. It was last changed
> > 62 da
> > #87667 gstreamerfiled: 546, changed 546
>
> As an example, this package was uploaded to experimental on friday,
> and has been packaged upstream for about a year. It was last changed
> 62 days ago.
Why experimental?
On Mon, 2002-08-26 at 19:30, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Hi!
>
> At te moment, there are a lot of old ITP's hanging around in the WNPP,
Hi,
When I was looking through the RFP list a while back, I noticed many
of them were for packages that were not maintained upstream - sometimes
they were still at
Il lun, 2002-08-26 alle 20:30, Bas Zoetekouw ha scritto:
> #68155 grassfiled: 1443, changed 1443
in Incoming by more than one month now.
--
Federico Di Gregorio
Debian GNU/Linux Developer & Italian Press Contact[EMAIL PROTECTED]
INIT.D Developer
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 08:30:13PM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> At te moment, there are a lot of old ITP's hanging around in the WNPP,
> with (seemingly) nothing happening to them. In order to clean out the
> WNPP, I intend to rename the ITP's that have been open longer than 1 year
> to RFP's. T
12 matches
Mail list logo
