[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-devel
Subject:    Re: mosh ITP not done, just package name taken over
From:       Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b () web ! de>
Date:       2012-03-30 12:22:03
Message-ID: 87fwcq9t3o.fsf () frosties ! localnet
[Download RAW message or body]

Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Ma, 27 mar 12, 08:36:58, David Banks wrote:
>> 
>> In the specific case of mosh, I have posted three RFS messages to
>> debian-mentors since filing the ITP, in addition to the creation of the
>> RFS bug after the sponsorship-requests procedure was announced, so the
>> package was certainly being worked on.  However I did not CC the RFS
>> messages to the ITP bug, so they weren't recorded there.  Would this be
>> a recommended practice?  How should it interact with the new
>> sponsorship-requests process?
>
> Block the ITP bug by the RFS bug?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei

+1. Since RFS are also bugs that seems to be the natural way to connect
the two.

MfG

        Goswin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwcq9t3o.fsf@frosties.localnet

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]