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

Re: interested in (co-)maintaining midori

On Monday, August 24 2015, I wrote:

> On Friday, August 14 2015, Andres Salomon wrote:
>>> Your work was done back in June, so if you prefer I can provide
>>> patches against your branch to implement/fix the issues I have been
>>> working on. It won't really matter much, I think: in the end, we'll
>>> have to use the "official" repository anyway and patch it.
>> That would be highly preferred, simply for reviewing purposes.  I'm
>> also happy to rewrite parts of my history to, for example, not include
>> the -O--buildsystem stuff.  But the existing git history is useful, and
>> I'd rather work from that.
> OK, I've done it:
>   <http://git.sergiodj.net/?p=debian/midori.git;a=summary>
> It's the same link, but the repository is a new one, based on the
> official repository.

Just another update.

I've re-created the repository above (the previous version contained
some mistakes, and I thought it made sense to restart from scratch).
Now, you can find the latest version of Midori (0.5.11, released a few
days ago) along with all the other changes that I had already made.

Still builds successfully, and I'm using this latest version without
problems.  IOW, everything is ready to be used in Debian, and I'm pretty
happy with the current state of the repository.

Andreas, what do you think if we push my changes to the official
repository and start working from there?  It has been a while since
we're discussing without reaching a real agreement, and Midori is still
not present in testing.

Meanwhile, I have been looking at the BTS and making a list of bugs that
should be fixed by this update.

Comments are welcome.


GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible

Reply to: