On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> That's true. Given the fact that there aren't any applications depending
> on 1.6, simply updating the sfml source package to version 2 should suffice.
Agreed.
> That sounds good. Christoph Egger is the current uploader of sfml but I
> th
Markus Koschany writes:
> That sounds good. Christoph Egger is the current uploader of sfml but I
> think he wouldn't refuse an offer for help. Even if the c and python
> bindings won't work anymore (at least for a while), I think it makes
> sense to move on with SFML 2, so that a real application
On 29.08.2013 21:30, James Cowgill wrote:
[...]
> I did think about creating a new package for SFML 2. In the end I
> decided not to since there aren't any applications in Debian using 1.6,
> and 1.6 hasn't been developed for about 3 years.
That's true. Given the fact that there aren't any applic
Hello Markus,
I've updated the source with the MIT copyright licences - thanks for
that.
I did think about creating a new package for SFML 2. In the end I
decided not to since there aren't any applications in Debian using 1.6,
and 1.6 hasn't been developed for about 3 years.
I think I would be i
Hello James,
I saw your reply to bug #706001 [1] and that you packaged SFML2 already.
Are you interested in maintaining the library for Debian? The package
looks quite nice and the only open question is whether it is sensible to
create a new SFML2 source package, so that it is possible to install
5 matches
Mail list logo
