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

Bug#857005: RFS: sigrok/0.3-1 [ITA]



Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sigrok"

 * Package name    : sigrok
   Version         : 0.3-1
   Upstream Author : none (metapackage)
 * URL             : none (metapackage)
 * License         : none (metapackage)
   Section         : electronics

  It builds those binary packages:

    sigrok     - Logic analyzer and protocol decoder software suite
(metapackage)

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/sigrok


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

    dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sigrok/sigrok_0.3-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  * Bump dependency to sigrok-cli >= 0.6.0.
  * Bump dependency on pulseview >= 0.3.0.
  * Bump dependency on sigrok-firmware-fx2lafw >= 0.1.4.
  * Standards-Version: 3.9.8 (no changes required).
  * Bump debhelper compat and dependency to 10
  * New maintainer (Closes: #852828)


The package was recently RFA'd by the current maintainer Uwe, see #852834,
and i would like to take over the maintenance of this package and the
related packages in the sigrok suite (see at
http://sigrok.org/wiki/Downloads).
RFSs for the other packages are already sent.
 Unfortunately Uwe doesn't have time for sponsoring the package, so i
would like to ask the community to guide me with the first steps.
To ease this i uploaded my version to
mentors.debian.net, see above.

The packaging work is version controlled here:

https://git.zgyarmati.de/debian-packaging/sigrok-debian

which repository i plan to migrate to collab-maint eventually once i'm
more set in the Debian infrastructure.

Please feel free to contact with any comments or questions, best regards


-- 
Zoltan Gyarmati
https://zgyarmati.de


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: