| 1 |
On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 17:43 -0500, Georg Rudoy wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert <soap@g.o>: |
| 3 |
> > Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the |
| 4 |
> > bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I |
| 5 |
> > feel |
| 6 |
> > leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I was previously proxy-maintaining it via Maxim Koltsov aka |
| 9 |
> maksbotan. |
| 10 |
> What's the best way for me to step up and maintain it more directly? |
| 11 |
> Would PRs on github work? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs |
| 16 |
rotting away. Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30 |
| 17 |
day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the |
| 18 |
eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. Send all |
| 19 |
your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo. Given that this |
| 20 |
leechcraft ecosystem has a very small, dedicated community, I think |
| 21 |
maintaining it in a separate overlay, pulled in by layman or whatever |
| 22 |
would still be a better approach. |
Archives