Brian May <b...@debian.org> writes: > David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> writes: > >> IMHO the right place to deal with this is upstream. And presumably upstream >> already knows? > > I am not sure of the best contact for upstream. Presumable the package > maintainer has good contacts with upstream (Matt Palmer is listed as the > package maintainer?). Talking to upstream, like it or not, is part of > the job of maintaining Debian packages. It makes it easier on upstream > only having to deal with one voice, the maintainer, who knows what > direction they want to take the package.
You are currently lecturing the de facto maintainer of ledger. Matt
hasn't done an upload since 2012.
To expand on my previous (terse) remarks, when python3 support lands
upstream, I'll have a look at packaging it. When I say upstream already
knows, it's because you pointed me to a posting on upstream's mailing
list. But in case that got lost I also filed an upstream bug
http://bugs.ledger-cli.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1203
> After the release of stretch I believe the plan is not to accept any new
> Python 2 packages. Eventually this is going to become an RC bug as a
> result of phasing out Python 2.7.
Well, no. python-ledger will be removed if python2 is. That's not
exactly the same thing.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
