-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all!
I'm very sorry. My e-mail filters made a mess and I was losing all this e-mails. I realize of them thanks to Peter's e-mail, so a lot of thanks to you! I was not aware about the newer upstream version. I will work this week on the package to keep it updated, so I hope to have the newer version packaged during this week. Thanks for your messages and sorry again. I will configure better my e-mail filters from now. On 28/01/15 09:15, Martin Quinson wrote: > ABI breakage is not a problem. Upstream should simply bump the so name > of the library, and you're set. If upstream does not do so, you can do > it yourself (but it would be better to do it for all distros and OSes). > > It's even a good news to have an active upstream that cleans up > his/her house and push the software forward. At least your packaging > efforts are worth it. > > Don't worry. > Mt > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:10:32AM +0000, Peter Spiess-Knafl wrote: >> I am currently in discussion with the upstream author: >> >> https://github.com/open-source-parsers/jsoncpp/issues/147 >> >> ABI compatibility looks terrible. >> >> On 01/27/2015 12:57 PM, Martin Quinson wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 11:41:49AM +0000, Peter Spiess-Knafl >>> wrote: >>>> The actual maintainer seems unresponsive. I contacted him 2 >>>> months ago and pinged again now, no luck so far. >>>> >>>> Can I adopt it, if there is no RFA? What if the current >>>> maintainer does not answer at all? >>>> >>>> Anyway I will start packaging current 0.7.x. And maybe the latest >>>> 1.3 for experimental. >>>> >>>> Would you be able to review/sponsor it, if it is done? >>> >>> I'm affraid I'm really overloaded right now. But if you come up >>> with a repackaging of libjsoncpp, we'll find a solution. There is >>> quite a few reverse dependencies (afaik), so we will find someone >>> to review and sponsor your packaging. I will have a very bad time >>> helping you packaging the stuff, though. >>> >>> If the maintainer is MIA, then we can upload the new versions as >>> NMU or even move to a team maintenance, don't stress. 2 months is >>> already something, but I'd prefer to not hijack the package before >>> another 2 months period, to give enough time to the maintainer to >>> react. >>> >>> I'm not really aware of what are the good practices in this domain >>> for debian. You should ask to some QA mailing list, maybe. >>> >>> Bye, Mt. >>> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUyKrlAAoJENpGtWKvvX1xNIYH/1D41EUrdaCq6aYnsJ3tyOaK QWc4Y7LQdewuKv54XquxVvxnw2UDHrzH3w30fCv/u3jqN7uhIR4ZVV5kvnFoptAY fFz7hqRosR7FBQhRRrJ3D6swZmhjd2dQwDd98Vz5z1sZBPQ13K/6IrsAe6U+Qusq f/sUXGoWKO9fqNWBBEmGZxnNj5L+P46a4IxTH8X3Mt0/qDLAKaTJEpezAmR4FGvz f9rBkweG5neMDXCwChssKBkXd3MR41mNbDw/28c7nFn/D+X02zRxfjxOv32Y7ulD 0Xq0gVRNU37USacT4zuHCtnd3SBNXUw7y5PXRiY/Yc5tGW1fOqSLNfY4iYhP4DM= =IK+O -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
