I agree with the option 2: please ship the 0.3 branch as soon as
possible, the 0.1 one is dead and is not developed any more and IMHO
there are no reasons to continue to distribute it!
...PLEASE!!!
Piviul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:40:27AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Boris Pek wrote:
> >>> At this point, I see 4 options:
> >>>
> >>> 1) status quo - leave supertux 0.1.x in sid, and supertux 0.3.x in
> >>> experimental
> >>> 2) only ship development version - u
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Boris Pek wrote:
>>> At this point, I see 4 options:
>>>
>>> 1) status quo - leave supertux 0.1.x in sid, and supertux 0.3.x in
>>> experimental
>>> 2) only ship development version - upload supertux 0.3.x to unstable
>>> 3) offer both versions, defaulting to
>> At this point, I see 4 options:
>>
>> 1) status quo - leave supertux 0.1.x in sid, and supertux 0.3.x in
>> experimental
>> 2) only ship development version - upload supertux 0.3.x to unstable
>> 3) offer both versions, defaulting to development version when user
>> runs apt-get install su
Am Mittwoch, den 21.08.2013, 17:40 -0700 schrieb Josh Triplett:
> Personally, I'd argue for 2, or failing that 3.
+1
- Fabian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 05:03:51PM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Fabian Greffrath
> wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, den 20.08.2013, 14:30 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
> >> Having both versions of supertux in two different source packages
> >> available in Debian is a go
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 20.08.2013, 14:30 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
>> Having both versions of supertux in two different source packages
>> available in Debian is a good and user friendly idea IMO. At one point
>> in the future, when the 0.3
Am Dienstag, den 20.08.2013, 14:30 +0200 schrieb Markus Koschany:
> Having both versions of supertux in two different source packages
> available in Debian is a good and user friendly idea IMO. At one point
> in the future, when the 0.3 series is considered stable, we will most
> likely switch to
On 19.08.2013 10:36, Vincent Cheng wrote:
[...]
> If we were to change this, I'd be more inclined to go with Ubuntu's
> approach here, i.e. package both and let users have the choice to
> install one or both at the same time. In Ubuntu, they have
> src:supertux which builds binary packages supertux
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 01:36:21AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Josh Triplett
>> wrote:
>> > Package: supertux
>> > Version: 0.1.3-3
>> > Severity: wishlist
>> >
>> > The supertux 0.3.x series has been i
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 01:36:21AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Package: supertux
> > Version: 0.1.3-3
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > The supertux 0.3.x series has been in experimental for years now. Any
> > reason not to upload it to un
Hi Josh,
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Package: supertux
> Version: 0.1.3-3
> Severity: wishlist
>
> The supertux 0.3.x series has been in experimental for years now. Any
> reason not to upload it to unstable?
No reason, aside from that's the state the package was in
Package: supertux
Version: 0.1.3-3
Severity: wishlist
The supertux 0.3.x series has been in experimental for years now. Any
reason not to upload it to unstable?
- Josh Triplett
-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experim
13 matches
Mail list logo
