On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 08:20:08PM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > I was just refraining from pulling the trigger too fast, because I am not > > familiar with the rules within the Debian CL team (strong or weak package > > ownership, need to wait for peer reviews…).
> _very_ weak ownership, if you do the work I’m more then happy to have you > upload it. The time which I can spend on packaging/Debian is irregular, so I > don’t want to be a roadblock. Ok. I may also contribute to other packages, so I understand that I can just go ahead (provided of course that I do not break anything). BTW, the git repository of clisp packaging is rather complex with many different branches (even one branch per release recently), making the git-buildpackage workflow uneasy. Would you be ok to move back to a more traditional workflow, with basically a master and an upstream branch (ideally also a pristine-tar branch)? I don't really see the point of all those branches, because tags should be enough to keep track of previous releases. But I may be missing something. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list pkg-common-lisp-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-common-lisp-devel
