Re: a11y: some issues in squeeze
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: a11y: some issues in squeeze
- From: Boris Dušek <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 00:36:18 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 4AB61354-5DE8-4633-9AEA-C2965DEE9397@brailcom.org>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <20110220213005.GA5142@gentoo.local> <20110220220518.GA22304@football.tbsaunde.org> <20110221113135.GA29722@gentoo.local> <email@example.com> <20110221122917.GF5240@const.famille.thibault.fr> <20110221160202.GA15429@gentoo.local> <20110221163518.GY7492@const.famille.thibault.fr> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Feb 25, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Milan Zamazal wrote:
> I've been constantly busy with other things preventing me to maintain
> speech-dispatcher Debian package properly. So I'm going to pass
> speech-dispatcher maintenance on my colleague, I'll act as his sponsor.
Hello, my name is Boris Dušek and I will maintain the speech-dispatcher
package. My idea is, as Milan suggested to me, to upload new version of the
package to unstable that would include fix for #611711, then let the situation
"settle" a little bit by waiting for speech-dispatcher to propagate to testing,
fixing remaining bugs from Debian BTS in the meantime. IMHO only after such
stabilization it makes sense to provide speech-dispatcher to squeeze in some
way, either through backports, or through upload to squeeze directly (no idea
whether that is possible now that squeeze is released).
I am aiming at getting new version of speech-dispatcher to unstable by the end
of this week.