Re: Jekyll update
On Saturday 31 May 2014 16:08:31 Harlan Lieberman-Berg wrote:
> If I had to pick one, I think I'd probably go with #3, in the desperate
> hopes that the two "plugins" can simply be fixed at whatever version
> they are at the time of the main jekyll update and that we won't run
> into problems needing an update of one of them between jekyll updates.
> But, I'm not the maintainer, so I'm happy to do it however you guys and
> gals would like.
Given that Debian contributor (*) time is limited, I'd shoot for the solution
that limit the work on contributor's time (provided users are not impacted),
i.e. solution #1: create a package per gem. (like ruby-jekyll-test-plugin)
> If you'd like to look at my work so far, I've put it up at
> https://github.com/hlieberman/debian-jekyll.
You could also push your work on a new branch on pkg-ruby-extras/jekyll repo.
This would avoid reviewers to add a remote to their git repo.
> I have the package lintian
> clean (or, it will be once an actual maintainer builds it and lintian
> stops whimpering about NMUs) except for the upstream GPG pedantic tag,
> which I will ping upstream about at some point to see if we can fix.
Cool. Thanks for your work.
All the best
(*) which includes DD, maintainer and volunteers like you
--
https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/
http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org
Reply to: