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

Re: State of automake packages

* Jordi Mallach (jordi@debian.org) wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 05:50:55PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > Well 1.6 actually takes these incompatibilities into account and
> > actually provides a binary called automake-1.6 and has other
> > mechanisms to smooth these API changes in the future. Anyway, it
> > wouldn't be too difficult to package automake1.6 alongside the other
> > two packages. I volunteer unless Kevin Dalley pipes up and says he
> > wants to do it. 
> That'd be great. It'd be even better if all the automake packages could
> be cleaned up and updated. Kevin, are you around?
> If Kevin can't, it'd be nice if someone (you? :) could take them give
> them some love.

Well I have plenty of love to give them :) But I'm horribly reluctant
to steal any packages out from underneath someone's nose. I suppose
I'll email him privately (actually CC him this mail) and if he gives
his blessing or does not respond I'll package 1.6. If he is still
unresponsive after that is all said and done we can consider him MIA?
Do people think that is fair? I'm not actually sure he's MIA, that's
just the general sense I'm getting from this thread.

Eric Dorland <dorland@lords.com>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C  2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6

Version: 3.12
GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ 
O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ 
G e h! r- y+ 

Attachment: pgpalXruLf0Db.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: