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

Bug#766132: marked as done (RFP: python-versioneer -- version-string management for VCS-controlled trees)

Your message dated Sun, 16 Feb 2020 11:08:09 -0500
with message-id <914a572c10ad248cbc305d9ab0aeaba61cfadaa0.camel@debian.org>
and subject line Re: ITP: python-versioneer -- version-string management for VCS-controlled trees
has caused the Debian Bug report #766132,
regarding RFP: python-versioneer -- version-string management for VCS-controlled trees
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
766132: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=766132
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

* Package name    : python-versioneer
  Version         : 0.12
  Upstream Author : Brian Warner <warner-github@lothar.com>
* URL             : https://github.com/warner/python-versioneer
* License         : Public domain
  Programming Lang: Python
  Description     : version-string management for VCS-controlled trees

This is a tool for managing a recorded version number in
distutils-based python projects. The goal is to remove the tedious and
error-prone "update the embedded version string" step from your
release process. Making a new release should be as easy as recording a
new tag in your version-control system, and maybe making new tarballs.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Package python-versioneer is currently in Sid. Closing this bug accordingly.

-- 
Thanks,
Boyuan Yang


On Sun, 6 May 2018 18:05:48 +0200 Daniel Stender <debian@danielstender.com>
wrote:
> I've taken a deeper look now and I'm stepping back. Uneasy package (modules
contain byte code),
> probably dead (last release 01/2017, last commit 07/2017), it's not trivial
to recreate a working
> setup (setup.cfg template etc.) - much overhead, and the reproducibility
problem from it appears to
> be gone if upstream just updates (1.8 in flask-limiter, see #852482).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


--- End Message ---
Reply to: