On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 22:26:22 Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > Hi Chris, > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 04:14:39PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > Just curious -- this is aprx version 2.08~svn580 but upstream has > > 2.08.svn593 available -- is there a reason to upload the older version > > rather than the newer? > > I messed up. I'm now aware of the problem. Okay -- no worries. I've done this myself and it's one of the reasons I try to make a debian/watch file so that I can use 'uscan --report-status' to check that I've got the latest [stable] upstream release. > > I had done most of the packaging work for aprx 2.08.svn593 and wrote this > > list about that earlier -- if you'd like to compare what I had done with > > your package, mine is here: > > > > http://debian-packages.coredump.us/debian/pool/main/a/aprx/ > > I missed this. Didn't think to search the archives. I will take a look at > your package before I embark upon the new package for the latest version. > > Iain. Cool -- thank you. It's not a big deal, I'm just trying to help out. As aprsd is to be removed, uploading aprx sounds like a good answer AFAIK, so I'm glad to see interest in aprx. I'm not sure if the 2.08.svn593 package I put together is 100% ready -- I don't have an APRS node so I was hoping to get feedback on the list from someone testing it. I'll be putting together an APRS node at my QTH when I can but I have higher priorities at the moment. -- Chris KB2IQN -- Chris Knadle Chris.Knadle@coredump.us
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.