Matthew Finkel: > On 11/02/2012 07:36 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote: >> Nick Mathewson: >>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM, adrelanos <adrela...@riseup.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Could you blog it please? >>> >>> >>> I'd like to see more discussion from more people here first, and see >>> whether somebody steps up to say, "Yeah, I can maintain that" here, or >>> whether somebody else who knows more than me about the issues has something >>> to say. Otherwise I don't know whether to write a "looking for maintainer" >>> post, a "who wants to fork" post, a "don't use Torsocks, use XYZZY" post, >>> or what. >>> >> >> If Robert wants someone to maintain it, I'd be happy to do so. I had >> wanted to extend it to do some various things anyway. I think it would >> be a suitable base for a bunch of things I'd like to do in the next year. >> >> All the best, >> Jake >> > > I saw this thread earlier but didn't have a chance to reply. I was > thinking about volunteering to patch it up and maintain it if no one > else wanted to take it on, also, but if you want to take the lead on it > then I'm more than happy to help you where ever possible...assuming this > is the direction that's decided upon. > > Matt
This is a great development. I am sure torsocks has enough issues for two developers. The next logical could be to get control over the old google code hosting, close the google code tracker, announce a news and redirect users and to import everything to torproject.org trac. Once I can post to the issue tracker I will help with testing, reporting bugs, patch the usewithtor/uwt script to your liking (if like me to and don't want to put this into the core). No miracles either. Cheers, adrelanos _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
