❦ 19 octobre 2016 12:06 +0100, Punit Agrawal :
>> I can do that for you. This is the proper solution as they can help in
>> moving forward. However, note that in the past, it is pretty rare for
>> the technical committee to overrule a maintainer. But each case is a
>> separate case, it may just
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 17 octobre 2016 15:36 +0100, Punit Agrawal :
>
>>> - Going the long way by asking the technical committee to hand over the
>>>maintainance of the package to you (I'll sponsor your uploads if you
>>>aren't DD). I can do it if you
❦ 17 octobre 2016 15:36 +0100, Punit Agrawal :
>> - Going the long way by asking the technical committee to hand over the
>>maintainance of the package to you (I'll sponsor your uploads if you
>>aren't DD). I can do it if you want.
>>
>> - Going the short way by putting your package as
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 17 octobre 2016 14:17 +0100, Punit Agrawal :
>
Someone proposed this in the bug report I linked above. The idea was
turned down.
>>>
>>> If there is someone motivated enough to take over the packaging of
>>> global, we can subm
❦ 17 octobre 2016 14:17 +0100, Punit Agrawal :
>>> Someone proposed this in the bug report I linked above. The idea was
>>> turned down.
>>
>> If there is someone motivated enough to take over the packaging of
>> global, we can submit the question to the technical committee. This is
>> an hostil
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 11 mars 2016 19:32 GMT, Wei Liu :
>
>>> I am not referring to all the ancient mails you mentioned, just a little
>>> pointer in order to see if it could be maybe possible to have an
>>> alternate package of GNU GLOBAL which can add the r
❦ 11 mars 2016 19:32 GMT, Wei Liu :
>> I am not referring to all the ancient mails you mentioned, just a little
>> pointer in order to see if it could be maybe possible to have an
>> alternate package of GNU GLOBAL which can add the recent improvements,
>> and let the users decide in an individu
Hey,
I also would like to see a newer version of global in debian. Some very
useful options of global/gtags are missing, and it's a bit sad as global is
mostly necessary fo swim in any big code project.
Please, ron, think about us. :)
--
PEB
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:18:13 +0100 Alberto Luaces wrote:
> Hi Wei,
>
Hi Alberto
> I am also interested in having the latest version of GNU GLOBAL. Do you
> have any references about the technical disagreement between this
> package and upstream?
>
I don't have any concrete reference. Sorry.
L
Hi Wei,
I am also interested in having the latest version of GNU GLOBAL. Do you
have any references about the technical disagreement between this
package and upstream?
I am not referring to all the ancient mails you mentioned, just a little
pointer in order to see if it could be maybe possible t
Package: global
Version: 5.7.1-2
Severity: wishlist
Tags: upstream
Hello
GNU GLOBAL 6.5.2 was release in December 2015. The version packaged in
Debian is 5.7.1 which is now more than 8 years old. Is it possible to
upgrade the version in Debian to the latest stable release?
I'm aware of the disag
11 matches
Mail list logo
