| 1 |
2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert <soap@g.o>: |
| 2 |
> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs |
| 3 |
> rotting away. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me, |
| 6 |
yeah, that's my bad. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30 |
| 10 |
> day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the |
| 11 |
> eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to |
| 14 |
that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and |
| 15 |
earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw |
| 16 |
them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old |
| 17 |
and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The ebuilds I have around use multibuild to build both qt4 and qt5 |
| 20 |
versions according to use flags. Is that still relevant, or the world |
| 21 |
has migrated to qt5 and the benefit of still supporting qt4 is not |
| 22 |
worth the effort and clumsiness? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Send all your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thanks, will do. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Georg Rudoy |
Archives