[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#302020: marked as done (Long description is useless)

Your message dated Mon, 8 Aug 2005 00:40:45 +0100
with message-id <20050807234045.GA14732@deprecation.cyrius.com>
and subject line Removed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Mar 2005 18:21:35 +0000
>From enrico@enricozini.org Tue Mar 29 10:21:34 2005
Return-path: <enrico@enricozini.org>
Received: from mid-1.inet.it [] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DGLLK-0006zw-00; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:21:34 -0800
Received: from 81-174-12-206.f5.ngi.it [::ffff:] by mid-1.inet.it via I-SMTP-5.2.3-520
	id ::ffff:; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:21:31 +0200
Received: from enrico by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DGLKL-00037q-6r; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:20:33 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Enrico Zini <enrico@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: Long description is useless
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.9
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:20:33 +0200
Message-Id: <E1DGLKL-00037q-6r@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: zeiberbude
Severity: normal


Long description is: "This package contains the Zeiberbude server and
documentation.".  Considering that the name of the package is
"zeiberbude", I would have guessed that, thanks.

Please have another read of the developers-reference, section
  "  Description: short and extended description",
then by all means, try again.

I particular I suggest to cover what does "zeiberbude" does, and why
should one user need it.  Keep in mind that short and long descriptions
are used by people to decide if they should install the package or not.

All of this of course also applies to zbdesk.



-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-686
Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8@euro, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8@euro (charmap=UTF-8)

Received: (at 302020-done) by bugs.debian.org; 7 Aug 2005 23:41:04 +0000
>From tbm@cyrius.com Sun Aug 07 16:41:03 2005
Return-path: <tbm@cyrius.com>
Received: from sorrow.cyrius.com [] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
	id 1E1ulL-0008IT-00; Sun, 07 Aug 2005 16:41:03 -0700
Received: by sorrow.cyrius.com (Postfix, from userid 10)
	id 5E42564D54; Sun,  7 Aug 2005 23:41:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by deprecation.cyrius.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id EE03A8441; Mon,  8 Aug 2005 00:40:45 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 00:40:45 +0100
From: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>
To: 302020-done@bugs.debian.org, 307564-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Removed
Message-ID: <20050807234045.GA14732@deprecation.cyrius.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Delivered-To: 302020-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,ONEWORD autolearn=no 

This package has been remoed from Debian for the following reason:

RoQA; longer orphaned than maintained, nearly unused according to

Martin Michlmayr

Reply to: