[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#696899: can anybody sponsor an ITP for premake4 ?

Hi Jonathan,

I just wanted to follow up on a couple of things - I wasn't sure if premake4 had made it into unstable yet? Also, when I originally proposed making premake4 a new package instead of updating the existing premake package, it was suggested that the original premake package could be removed from unstable, as it's out of date and doesn't appear to be used by anyone (see http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/12/msg00283.html). Does that sound like a sensible idea to you and if so are you able to remove it?



On 19 April 2013 07:54, Cameron Hart <cameron.hart@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks! Experimental makes sense given how close Wheezy must be to being done. I wouldn't hold your breath on 4.4, it's an active project but not a terribly fast moving one. Also most of the development effort has moved onto a bit of a rewrite that will probably become 4.5 or 5. That said I've noticed a few projects using the 4.4 beta in the wild, so it may be worth updating to that if that's what people want to use.

On 19 April 2013 06:26, Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:33:54AM +1000, Cameron Hart wrote:
> I've applied your changes and have updated to rules file to support
> get-orig-source. I've used CDBS to do this, it has support for downloading
> upstream tarballs and repacking them.
> I've uploaded a new version to mentors including your changes and my update
> rules file. I was in a bit of a hurry, so hopefully it's all OK.

Looks good — I've uploaded, with a single change that I missed right from the
start, changing the suite from unstable to experimental. Sorry but I don't want
to upset the RMs this late in the release cycle. But it still needs to navigate
NEW anyway and hopefully once that's done a re-up to unstable will be swift (or
perhaps 4.4 will be out by then)

Reply to: