On 01/31/2017 09:08 AM, David Seifert wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
>>> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version
>>> to
>>> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.
On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> > I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version
> > to
> > that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70
> > and
> > earlier (if any) indeed could b
On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to
> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and
> earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw
> them, are due to the current last releas
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
>> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs
>> rotting away.
>
> I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me,
> yeah, that's my
2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs
> rotting away.
I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me,
yeah, that's my bad.
> Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30
> day time period,
On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 17:43 -0500, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> 2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> > Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
> > bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I
> > feel
> > leechcraft should probably live in an overlay
2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
> bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel
> leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree.
I was previously proxy-maintaining it via M
Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel
leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree.
# David Seifert (30 Jan 2017)
# No maintainer activity since git migration, dated eclass
#
