Bug#819647: ITP: python-flask-restful-swagger -- Swagger spec extractor for flask-restful

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Adrian Alves * Package name: python-flask-restful-swagger Version : 0.19 Upstream Author : Ran Tavory * URL : https://github.com/rantav/flask-restful-swagger * License : MIT Programming Lang: Python Description

Bug#819648: ITP: python-marshmallow -- simplified object serialization

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Adrian Alves * Package name: python-marshmallow Version : 2.6.1 Upstream Author : Steven Loria * URL : https://github.com/marshmallow-code/marshmallow * License : MIT Programming Lang: Python Description

Bug#819649: ITP: tinydb -- TinyDB is a lightweight document oriented database optimized for your happiness

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Adrian Alves * Package name: tinydb Version : 3.1.3 Upstream Author : Markus Siemens * URL : https://github.com/msiemens/tinydb * License : MIT Programming Lang: Python Description : TinyDB is a lightweight

Bug#822922: ITP: python-stopit -- Timeout control decorator and context manager

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Adrian Alves * Package name: python-stopit Version : 1.1.1 Upstream Author : Gilles Lenfant * URL : https://github.com/glenfant/stopit * License : GPL-3+ Programming Lang: Python Description : Timeout control

Bug#827840: ITP: qstopmotion -- qStopMotion is a free application for creating stop-motion animation movies

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Adrian Knoth * Package name: qstopmotion Version : newer than 2.2.0 Upstream Author : Ralf Lange * URL : http://www.qstopmotion.org/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: C++ Description : qStopMotion is a free

Re: Dropping awk?

On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 06:25:53PM +0100, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 02:56:58PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 01:38:18PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > Simon Josefsson wrote: > > > > Debian trixie images ship with

Re: Explicitly depending on Essential packages (was: Dropping awk?)

then there's the normal time-waste like "the package ships a bash-completion file that uses awk, grep, sed and sort - that's dependencies on four essential packages". > Regards, > Branden >... cu Adrian

Re: Dropping awk?

On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 07:44:34PM +0100, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 08:58:29PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 06:05:13PM +0100, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 12:48:08PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > > &

Re: Explicitly depending on Essential packages (was: Dropping awk?)

On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 06:58:36PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Hi Adrian, Hi Branden, > At 2025-04-21T01:34:56+0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: >... > My impression from watching countless upgrades over the years is that, > when any Essential package is available for upgrade, upg

Re: Dropping awk?

would be for the use case where a user does not want to be able to install security updates, but does need binary compatibility with Debian. That's a rare use case. When binary compatibility is not required, source-based distributions will always provide smaller images with slightly better performance. cu Adrian

Re: Dropping awk?

nd sed in the relevant package set could immediately be replaced with usage of the essential Perl. Unless someone wants to get rid of Perl in the essential set, which is 10 times the size of AWK and sed combined. The sane starting point would be discussing which tools should be part of the (tra

Re: Dropping awk?

awk (for those that happen to be >reproducible) >... Tools like awk/sed/perl would have to stay part of the build essential set if they get dropped from the essential set. Example: /usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4:AC_REQUIRE([AC_PROG_AWK])dnl > Helmut cu Adrian

Re: Dropping awk?

t work with original-awk is found when changing the default, but I would be surprised if this would uncover a large number of bugs. > Regards, > Branden >... cu Adrian

Re: Proposed MBF: packages that FTBFS with make --shuffle

On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 06:58:22PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > El 14/5/25 a las 12:50, Adrian Bunk escribió: >... > > How many of the packages that break with "make --shuffle" are currently > > doing parallel building? > > I am asking since these might be R

Re: Proposed MBF: packages that FTBFS with make --shuffle

age already does "dh --no-parallel" and the upstream Makefiles are basically unfixable? Just close the bug? Strip "--shuffle" in debian/rules? How many of the packages that break with "make --shuffle" are currently doing parallel building? I am asking since these might be RC bugs for trixie. > Lucas cu Adrian

Re: Linux Core Consortium

On Friday 10 December 2004 06.15, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]: > > we could participate in this organization even if we didn't take > > their packages? That is, perhaps we could influence the direction to > > a more useful one? > Then we would b

Re: Linux Core Consortium

On Friday 10 December 2004 15.35, Steve Langasek wrote: > we don't exactly have a strong history of being able to pull off > timely releases Did Debian even try? I didn't follow the woody release too closely, being a Debian newbie at the time, so I don't know. But - this was my impression - fro

Re: Removal of freeswan from sarge

On Friday 10 December 2004 13.20, Frank KÃster wrote: > Rene Mayrhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am still thinking about doing an "upgrade" package of freeswan > > though, which depends on openswan and simply moves the configuration of > > the old freeswan configuration to openswan. Any pref

Re: Linux Core Consortium

Yo all! Seeing this discussion wander in many directions, please consider what is acutally under discussion here: Bruce: > I would not suggest that Debian commit to using LCC packages at this > time. We should participate for a while and see how many changes we'd > have to make and whether the

Re: removing in postrm rc*.d symlinks that I did not create

On Thursday 16 December 2004 00.34, Nicolas Boullis wrote: [de-installing run-level links that weren't installed] How about installing links as /etc/rc?.d/K??foo - so the links are there and are properly manageable, but the init script will only be called as 'K??foo stop' -- vbi -- Segunda le

Re: [volatile] status update

On Friday 24 December 2004 11.01, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 09:21:08PM -0500, William Ballard wrote: > > I was trying to think of a word for "news you need to know now and will > > not be of much use to you in the far future." > > "debian-devel"? :-P No, that's "news yo

Re: ITP reminder emails

On Thursday 30 December 2004 10.07, Maciej Dems wrote: > please notify, that many ITPs > are done by non-DDs. In this case the main reason for their inactivity is > the lack of a sponsor. IMHO for such ITPs, the RFS should be cc:ed to the bug, so anybody reviewing the ITP would see that it's not

Re: Bug#288769: ITP: cedilla -- ascii to postscript renderer

On Wednesday 05 January 2005 22.55, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 04:43:05PM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > > An ascii to postscript renderer ... > I think you want to say "plaintext to postscript renderer" here, since

Re: Switchconf: Orphaning or removing?

On Thursday 06 January 2005 08.01, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Now, switchconf is too simple. It does very little, but does not do it > very well. I originally intended to work with it to make it much more > robust... But in the end, I didn't get around to do it. IMHO removing it is the right solution.

execturing libc (was: Re: Who could be able to help SW vendors to support Debian?)

On Wednesday 02 February 2005 06.35, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > I think you meant to ask, "Why would anyone want to execute the C > library?" > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /lib/libc.so.6 Ok, this is off topic for this thread, but still, strangely: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /lib/ld-2.3.2.s

Re: Diversion of APT tools by dpkg-cross (apt-get,apt-cache,apt-config)

On Tuesday 01 February 2005 21.49, Raphael Bossek wrote: > Message was signed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Key ID: 0x376941AB835EB2FF). > Warning: The signature is bad. Something's broken somewhere... Can anybody confirm so I can stop worrying about my set up? thanks -- vbi -- Press CTRL-ALT-DEL to c

Re: announcing first release of common database infrastructure package

On Friday 04 March 2005 23.57, sean finney wrote: > anyone who is tired of having to spend hours maintaining their > home-rolled mysql/pgsql mangement maintainer script code is whole > heartedly encouraged to check this out! *applaudes heartily* That's sorely needed. Now I hope that the point wh

Re: help with bug 296693

tags 296693 +unreproducible thanks On Saturday 05 March 2005 00.16, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Can a user with an i386 attempt to reproduce the bug and report back? I appear to be able to use gnucash just fine, I checked all the library versions in the bug report and adjusted my system accord

Not every package should enter Debian (was: Re: Who cares about NEW when there are bigger issues? (was Re: Is NEW processing on hold? (was: Question for candidate Towns)))

On Tuesday 08 March 2005 15.55, Javier FernÃndez-Sanguino PeÃa wrote: > > Further: do not accept every package to enter Debian... > > Should be done, but if ftp-maintainers take this decissions they get > bashed on the basis of them preventing "freedom". And we're back again to > the pointless hot-

Re: Not every package should enter Debian

On Wednesday 09 March 2005 06.39, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > There is another problem with NEW: The US laws. > > Untill a package has been processed through NEW and a mail send to > some goverment agency Debian runs risk of violating the crypto export > laws. I've already proposed this: if si

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Monday 14 March 2005 05.45, Steve Langasek wrote: > Architectures that are no longer being considered for stable releases > are not going to be left out in the cold. ÂThe SCC infrastructure is > intended as a long-term option for these other architectures, and the > ftpmasters also intend to pro

Re: Debian DPL Debate Comments

[cc to you - I don't know if you read the list] On Friday 18 March 2005 17.22, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > As for example, it's been now around 7 years for me now using Linux and I > do have a fair amount of knowledge now. It would be great if DD's here > could harness the skills in "wannabe contr

Re: Alternate proposal for Declassification of debian-private archives

On Thursday 01 December 2005 15.32, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > +   - If the author indicates he does not wish to be associated with a > +     post, any identifying information is redacted from that post, > +     and any quotes in subsequent posts, but the rest of the material > +     is published.

Re: Announcement: Common Power-Management Framework

On Friday 02 December 2005 14.13, Kevin Locke wrote: > Would it be better to spend our time adding features to the Gnome Power > Manager and equivalents instead of creating a separate program? The problem here is the *Gnome and equivalents*. IMHO any work spent to extend the functionality of the

New postgrey Debian package uploaded - please test

Hi, (postgrey mailing list: this is totally irrelevant if you're not using Debian.) I've just uploaded a new version of the postgrey Debian package - 1.23-2 (really *just* uploaded it. You can get it from until it appears in unstable.) postgrey 1.23 has a

Re: Unstable status

On Wednesday 14 December 2005 23.31, Kai Hendry wrote: > http://natalian.org/archives/2005/12/14/unstable-is-just-that/ Well, the topic of #debian-devel is quite a standard place to look for up to the minute information - and is a place developers actually update as they fix things or notice br

Re: Removing gtksee package

On Monday 12 December 2005 14.48, Nico Golde wrote: > So what do you think should I request a removal or wait for > an adopter? Upstream dead, a few annoying bugs, replacements available in Debian. I think quite a clear case. Since it still works, I would not do the wrapper thing Goswin sugges

Re: AgSync

On Friday 16 December 2005 16.49, Robin wrote: > Is AgSync still being actively developed for Debian ? > I have searched for info and this is the only place I have seem an > info for AgSync... Looking at the changelog of the Debian package (

Re: Debian Installer team monthly meeting minutes (20051214 meeting)

On Saturday 17 December 2005 09.30, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Dec 17, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It is currently very likely that systems with two network interfaces > > will end up with both switched on the installed system after the > > reboot. This is of course a blocker. >

Re: I got a new address!

On Tuesday 20 December 2005 10.33, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 17:05 -0500, Joey DePeter wrote: > > Hey, can you send me dueling banjos sheet music for the viola, I met > > someone and they play the viola and they love it. > > > > Regards, > > Martin > > This really looks like it's a

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12.23, Thomas Hood wrote: > I don't think that it is ridiculous to require that every package have a > team behind it---i.e., at least two maintainers. First, if someone can't > find ONE other person willing to be named as a co-maintainer of a given > package then I

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 19.24, Russ Allbery wrote: [mandatory comaintainers] > I think that the energy used to define these sorts of procedures is > probably better used finding a package with a large bug count and > volunteering to work with the maintainer to try to get the bug count > down.

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 20.10, Thomas Hood wrote: > It turns out that there is no need for them to be hurt at all.  Lone > can carry on working as before and find a co-maintainer who won't get > in his way.  But when Lone falls off his horse he'll be glad that Tonto > is nearby.   Except tha

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 18.32, David Nusinow wrote: [teams like gnome, kde, d-i, kernel, ...] > It's pretty simple to found such a team too. All it takes is some > interested people and an alioth project. And here you say the most important thing: it takes *interested* people. People int

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Thursday 22 December 2005 09.38, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On the other hand, I think there might be some benefit to requiring > that the Maintainer field must always denote one single Debian > developer, who would be the "buck stops here" guy for that > package. Not an applicant, not a mailing l

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

Thomas, sorry for continuing the debate still on this single aspect of Lars' mail :-) On Thursday 22 December 2005 10.02, Thomas Hood wrote: > C) Fix bugs that have been reported > For C, Lars discussed different degrees of shift from solitary toward > collective maintainership. In the seque

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

On Thursday 22 December 2005 10.55, Frank Küster wrote: > - how many bugs does a package have > - how many have not been dealt with for n months (or days/weeks for RC > bugs) Changing the default ordering on the bts web pages from bug age to 'last action age' might already show some effect. Hm

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

[lots of snippage] I fear I don't see your point - and I feel you don't see mine. Here's why I feel *forced* comaintainership is not a solution: Maintainers divide in (i) those who already work in teams on their packages (ii) those who don't. Ignore (i). (ii) divides in (a) those who do a g

Re: New experimental sysvinit

On Friday 23 December 2005 01.40, Linas Zvirblis wrote: > Thomas Hood wrote: > > No-login mode at boot until boot complete: > > DELAYLOGIN=yes No-login mode never: rm -f /var/lib/initscripts/nologin > > ; DELAYLOGIN=no No-login mode always: touch > > /var/lib/initscripts/nologin

Re: debian-devel@lists.debian.org

Hi Milan, Jon, As discussed, 'the Debian project' as such has huge difficulties accepting hardware donations - offers are often turned down. (tangent - in my opinion donations should be accepted more liberally and if the Debian administrators can not be bothered to administer yet another machin

Re: stable aliases for CD drives

On Thursday 29 December 2005 14.45, Finn-Arne Johansen wrote: > Would it not be enough for apt if d-i created an fstab that linked > /dev/hdX -> /media/cdrom ? Won't work because the problem at hand is exactly that /dev/hdX won't necessarily be stable anymore. (and, once more, and much worse:

Re: stable aliases for CD drives

On Friday 30 December 2005 01.19, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 05:55:03PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > > On Thursday 29 December 2005 14.45, Finn-Arne Johansen wrote: > > > Would it not be enough for apt if d-i created an fstab that linked > > >

Re: ITK: debmake

On Friday 30 December 2005 03.18, Anthony Towns wrote: > Santiago: > > As a realistic goal, I estimate that etch will be the last release > > containing debmake, but of course, I would be deligthed to see it > > happen sooner. > > It would be pretty lame if we couldn't do this in less than a year..

Re: ITK: debmake

On Saturday 31 December 2005 18.48, Osamu Aoki wrote: [debmake] > As I see in debian-reference: > --- > A.3.2 debmake > [...] > However, it's not a bug to use debmake. > --- > I should remove last sentence from all translations. Or just drop mention of debmake alltogether? The description of the

Re: udev event completion order

On Monday 02 January 2006 14.48, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:29:16PM +, Darren Salt wrote: > > I'd call that broken, just as I consider udev (076) to be broken given > > that it breaks expectations wrt device naming. (Here, it swapped the > > names of the DVD drives (driver

Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers

On Monday 02 January 2006 16.21, Alejandro Bonilla wrote: [...] > I could support or maintain some packages if I could be teached once, and > if the mentoring process to get ownership of one package wouldn't be a > pain. I once wanted to make a package for the ieee80211 stack or another > small pac

Re: bits from the release team

On Wednesday 04 January 2006 00.43, Brian Nelson wrote: > Why don't we use RHEL's kernel, or collaborate with them to maintain a > stable kernel tree, or something? The real nice thing would be a central mailing list where all kernel development were coordinated. Perhaps some sort of industry-s

Re: bits from the release team

On Wednesday 04 January 2006 09.53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > Better to use a tested and stable kernel in stable whenever it is > released rather than trying to synch to current kernels sometime too > close to release time just for the sake of releasing a semi-current > kernel. Well sarge's

Re: Maintaining a debian package

On Tuesday 03 January 2006 22.59, Andi Drebes wrote: > Hi there! > [...] As I'm using debian and like it > pretty much, I'd like to add it to the list of packages that debian > oficially provides. The first problem is, that I don't know how to create > debian-packages. Start here:

Re: ITP

On Thursday 05 January 2006 00.29, campanoni simone wrote: > ~ - i'd like to try to mantain the wss packet (to learn to mantein > a debian packet) Start here: Especially at Then, for all the details, there is

Re: Request for Replacement Packager for Ampache

On Friday 06 January 2006 19.47, Karl Vollmer wrote: > Hello All, > > I apologize if this is the incorrect list to use for this purpose, > however a few months back I posted an ITP as I thought I would > actually have time to package up Ampache (http://www.ampache.org) > However that hasn't happe

Re: ITP vexim2

Daniel: > is there anybody - preferred German speakers - who is willing and able > to package this OR to give assistance to me (i would try packaging when > there is somone helping me)??? Hi Daniel! An 'ITP' is supposed to be filed in the Debian bug tracking system. Best just use the 'reportbug

Re: Powerfulness

On Tuesday 10 January 2006 03:44, Miles Bader wrote: > Juergen Salk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > According to their package descriptions, we seem to have exactly > > six powerful text editors in Debian. These are elvis, jove, > > mined, ne, nedit and zed. Emacs, vim and many others do not > > be

Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 3

On Monday 09 January 2006 19:20, Bill Allombert wrote: > Here the lists of packages involved in circular dependencies listed by > maintainers. Just wondering why this wasn't mentioned yet: aren't circular dependencies causing more work for RM's, too, because the testing migration script can't h

Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 3

On Friday 13 January 2006 16:53, you wrote: > Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > From a graph algorithm point of view, if I'm not very mistaken, > > dependencies being guaranteed to be a directed graph instead of a > > generic graph should allow

Andrew Suffield

Do you think your constant bitching is funny? Do you think it achieves anything? There are other DDs who are also involved in intense debates and flamewars very often, but you're the only one where I constantly get the impression that you're just being childish, insulting and annoying for the

Re: [ad-hominem construct deleted]

On Sunday 15 January 2006 10:27, Sami Haahtinen wrote: > What do you want? Bugs filed in Debian's bts, with the patches attached and the rationale why this patch is done. Just like many DD work with upstream, by pushing non-Debian changes back actively, and not just saying 'all are changes are

Re: For those who care about lesbians

On Saturday 14 January 2006 18:16, Mike Bird wrote: > There was nothing offensive about Andrew's message. Context. This debate is not at all about the content of Andrew's message. Somebody tried to increase the cooperation between Debian and Ubunut in a well-meant effort (personally, while I

Re: For those who care about lesbians

On Sunday 15 January 2006 09:31, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 01:44:06 +0100, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > On Sunday 15 January 2006 00:47, Adam Heath wrote: > >> In fact, both of the last 2 emails to d-d-a go against the AUP. > >> Procedures should be started to punish

Re: Apology for MIA, Retiring, RFA: x-symbol, xmix, oneko

[ retiring ] Just in case you missed that part: if you want your account to be closed etc, please inform the keyring maintainer as per (and with a gpg-signed email, bug on dev-reference being filed.) cheers -- v

Re: For those who care about debian-devel-announce

On Wednesday 18 January 2006 18:07, Martin Schulze wrote: > Posting permissions to debian-devel-announce revoked after making a > point. [public announcmement of the above on d-d-a] Thank you very much. Very well written. -- vbi -- The early bird gets the coffee left over from the night befor

Re: Bug#351470: ITP: libmail-gnupg-perl -- Perl module for processing email with GPG

think this should be mentioned in the description. (And I'm just wondering: does it handle both PGP/MIME signed + encrypted as separate layers, S/MIME style, and also as signed+encrypted OpenPGP blob in one multipart/encrypted container?) cheers -- vbi -- pub 1024D/92082481 2002-02-22 A

Re: Bug#351470: ITP: libmail-gnupg-perl -- Perl module for processing email with GPG

On Sunday 05 February 2006 03:58, gregor herrmann wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: gregor herrmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > * Package name: libmail-gnupg-perl > GnuPG::Interface can process or create PGP signed or encrypted > email. Oh, and: either it's Mail::GnuPG here

Re: Automatic testing of .deb's

On Monday 06 February 2006 19:53, Gustavo Franco wrote: > On 2/6/06, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ filing automatic package tests to the Debian bts ] > The Ubuntu maintainer should always open bugs with the test related stuff > and see if the Debian maintainer judge it's valuable or not

Re: TrueType fonts packages maintenance team proposal

On Monday 20 February 2006 07:40, Christian Perrier wrote: > So, I hereby propose to think about a possible TTF fonts packaging > team. A comment as a pure user insofar as fonts are concerned: I don't care if what I see comes from a ttf, metafont, ps, bdf or PEX font. I just want the font to b

Re: Bug#354831: ITP: bfc -- Brainfuck compiler

On Thursday 02 March 2006 04:46, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > Package: libacme-brainfck-perl > Provides: libacme-brainfuck-perl Ah, and back to the time when some words where magic and caused burn marks on the paper around the ink. I never have and probably never will see why some people find 'f*ck'

Re: For those who care about stable updates

ObIntro: I add my thanks to all the others' On Thursday 09 March 2006 14:38, Gustavo Franco wrote: > What's wrong with us ? I just read some messages with a "no Martin, > can we revert it?", it seems that the default reply is "ok Martin, see > you, thanks.". > > It's volunteer work, he's free to d

Re: For those who care about stable updates

On Thursday 09 March 2006 18:41, Amaya wrote: > ... focus on attacking Ubuntu Ah, yes, we need an enemy so we can unite against it. Old-fashioned tactics, proved to work. -- vbi /me is trying to imagine the Debian project's members trying to agree on an enemy... -- One picture is worth 128K

Re: For those who care about stable updates

On Saturday 11 March 2006 03:27, Kevin Mark wrote: [DPL as mediator] The DPL already could do that. The DPL probably in the past *did* step in in some cases behind the scenese. There's no reason for the technical overhead of a mediator@ email alias - there's leader, and people who trust the D

Re: For those who care about stable updates

On Saturday 11 March 2006 09:10, Kevin Mark wrote: > -- vbi: > > Kevin: [mediation] > > > After the meeting everyone would agree to not discuss anything in > > > public and only redress further problems by arranging another private > > > irc session. > > > > Hmm.  I agree with you that solving the

Re: Sarge release for amd64 - Please help to fix the remaining bugs

On Monday 25 April 2005 14.51, Andreas Jochens wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > >> libmysqlclient-lgpl - Linuxthreads test has to be switched off for > >> amd64 [...] > Unfortunately, quite a few important packages still Build-Depend > on libmysqlclient10-dev: > exim4 Does that mean amd64 inst

Re: Free Game Console

On Saturday 30 April 2005 07.54, Dillinger wrote: > Hi, > I invented Macromedia Flash. [...] Can I get one of those things your're smoking? -- vbi -- Could this mail be a fake? (Answer: No! - http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro) pgp2E1218gns7.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Dualing banjos

On Saturday 07 May 2005 16.56, Brad and Billie Fick wrote: > do you know how I can get the sheet music to this? If so I would greatly > appreciate it. Thank you There we go again. I am so glad this happens, helps to lighten the mood everywhere and certainly eases the way to general happiness in

Re: Bug#309241: ITP: dguitar -- Guitar Pro 3/4 tabs viewer and player

On Sunday 15 May 2005 23.24, Grzegorz Bizon wrote: > Description : Guitar Pro 3/4 tabs viewer and player Somebody should file a wishlist bug against all guitar related software packages to include a certain song as example data. I won't name it. If you're new on this list, google for "se

Re: removing ipfwadm

On Monday 16 May 2005 23.27, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On May 16, Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am not sure whether the ipfwadm package should be removed. Kernels > > up to 2.4 still have support for ipfwadm filtering rules, so > > theoretically people could still be using it with curr

Re: updated cogito package - now with docs!

[cc:ed as I don't know if you read both -devel and -mentors] On Wednesday 11 May 2005 22.05, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: [cogito] Sebastian, can I humbly request that you don't announce cogito package updates on (at least the -devel) mailing list? While I - and, I guess, many others - are thril

Re: RFC: A new video-related section

On Friday 27 May 2005 14.15, Gergely Nagy wrote: > On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 14:13 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > the right thing to do would be to switch from sections, to keywords, so > > that kmplayer could live in sound + video + kde, instead of multimedia > > that is not very informative. > >

Re: How to find really old source of the shadow package

On Monday 30 May 2005 02.03, Nicolas François wrote: > Does anybody know where I can find older sources? [ of shadow ] - have you tried asking the shadow maintainers (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) - perhaps somebody has old CVS repositories or whatever lying around? - The Debian changelog goes back to

Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?

On Tuesday 31 May 2005 19.17, Stephen Birch wrote: > > Still looks more like a fork than a derivative . or a spoon :-) I have problems with your terminology - what do you mean by 'fork', and what do you mean by 'derivative'? To my understanding, Ubuntu is certainly a derivative of Debian (si

Re: notes on deckit WAP phone simulator

On Saturday 04 June 2005 07.50, venkat prasad wrote: > sir, > > can u please give me the information bout the decik WAP phone > simulator.i.e., the brief description about the phone simulator. As far as I can tell, Debian does not ship the decit WAP phone simulator, so I don't know what

Re: Perl or Java project

On Saturday 04 June 2005 19.20, Joshua Jackson wrote: > Where could I find out about projects that still need developers. I could > code in perl and java. Please tell me where I can read the resources > regarding to the available projects in debian. Java: A group of people tries very hard to get

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 01.03, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > [ End user improvements ] - better support for displaying as many languages as possible without having to search for corresponding font packages. From what I can see gnome is slightly better than KDE in replacing missing ch

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 01.47, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Jun 07, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In my wishlist there is NO support of 2.4 kernels Hmm. I've never verified this myself, however until recently it was often claimed that 2.6 is still quite a bit worse tha

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 19.51, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Jun 07, Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In my wishlist there is NO support of 2.4 kernels > > > > Hmm. I've never verified this myself, however until recently it was > > oft

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 23.32, Roger Leigh wrote: > Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 23:02, Roger Leigh wrote: > >> Existing installs are already configured with debconf. Their > >> /etc/locale.gen will not be touched. > >> > >> If you do dpkg-reconfigure locales,

Re: Bug#312669: /sbin/ifconfig: Add ifconfig to user path

On Friday 10 June 2005 10.40, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Hello Olaf, > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:58:21PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > ifconfig is in /sbin and only in root's path. But ifconfig is runnable > > and useful for normal users, so it'd be nice if it could be added to > > the path

Re: TODO for etch ?

On Friday 10 June 2005 21.39, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: > Hello. > > Is the TODO list for etch available anywhere? It is now. Please help updating it. Because I really mean it, I repeat here the guidelines that I feel can keep this list useful instead

Re: Bug#312897: ITP: texlive -- The TeXlive system packaged for debian

On Monday 13 June 2005 09.41, frank wrote: [texlive vs. teTeX] > Let me add some comments from my point of view (Debian teTeX > maintainer). Sounds like packaging texlive and trying to get it really stable would be the thing to do, with the goal of phasing out teTeX for etch+1 Not becuase I don'

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Monday 13 June 2005 23.00, John Hasler wrote: > Jesus Climent writes: > > Exactly my point, what impedes an admin to set some defaults wether the > > system comes as it comes now or with some predefined options and > > settings? > > Nothing, except for the fact that most "admins" haven't the fog

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

On Tuesday 14 June 2005 08.00, Eric Dorland wrote: > 3. Accept MoFo's offer of Debian-specific trademark usage. > I don't > believe #3 is acceptable under the DFSG. IMHO this *trademark* license corresponds quite exactly to the *copyright* license that require renaming on change, which seems to

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >