Hi Alexander, On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:05:23AM +0200, Alexander Shulgin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 20:39, Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> wrote:On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 08:16:11PM +0200, Alexander Shulgin wrote:As I look around this, I see that "ITP" means "Intent to Package". Isn't there someone who's readily trying to package png++ or it's more like 'request to package'? If it's more like a wishlist thing, I think I can try to package it myself. But I give no ETAs. ;)RFP means Request For Packaging - i.e. please can someone package this.ITP means Intend To Package - i.e. This is in planning stage of actually getting packaged.And in this case it was a short process: I filed the ITP while actually packaging, and the package was sent to Debian as soon as the Bug Tracker responded with a bug number that I could tie to the initial release.OK, thanks for explanation. If it is in process already, then I don't need to do anything.Just let me know if you need my help in any png++-related matters. :)
I sure will.Also, now that you've posted to this ITP bugreport you are automatically subscribed to further updates on same bugreport - including when (or if) the package gets approved by Debian ftpmasters where the bugreport will get closed.
When (or if) the package enters debian, the following page will be created, containing details on the health of the packaging:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/png%2B%2B.htmlDon't both yet, it does not exist. If curious how it will look then check some other package: http://packages.qa.debian.org/libg/libgd2.html
Kind regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature