| 1 |
Unless somebody else wants to do it, I am about to step in here to keep |
| 2 |
GNUstep in the tree. I already did some research on it, and it seems it |
| 3 |
needs an update, and the previous maintainer masked a few of the CVS |
| 4 |
ebuilds, so that eases things a bit. Seems many of the packages can use |
| 5 |
an upgrade, so I'll give it a try today to see if I can get it working |
| 6 |
again. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I'm going to look into more detail to it today, so if someone has |
| 9 |
objections, please state them now. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I would really like to see a new GNUstep maintainer, but I'm not in the |
| 12 |
desktop herd or something, neither a frequent user of GNUstep any more. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
On 19-03-2006 03:23:26 +0100, Fabian Borschel wrote: |
| 16 |
> Hi Devs, |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> On 2006-03-18 12:53:09 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@g.o> wrote: |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> >However, since the GNUStep herd is void, no one has stepped up to fix |
| 21 |
> >those ebuilds - meaning we have a bunch of useless, non-functional, |
| 22 |
> >live CVS ebuilds laying around in portage, see the list below. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Did you look into bugs.gentoo.org? There are new ebuild (which don't |
| 25 |
> use CVS). Maybe not for all GNUstep ebuilds, but there are users who |
| 26 |
> are interested in GNUstep stuff (take me for an example). If you |
| 27 |
> search a new maintainer I would do the job. But I'm no Gentoo-Dev yet. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Regards, |
| 30 |
> Fabian |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives