Re: libcifpp transition
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: libcifpp transition
- From: "Maarten L. Hekkelman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:44:02 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Op 31-01-2022 om 14:49 schreef Andrius Merkys:
This is purely informational. It says you probably should not attempt
transitioning libcifpp and libpdb-redo at the same time.
Hmmm, that didn't work, had to update both to make this work.
Anyway, now someone needs to file that bug to ask for a time slot. Who
is supposed to do that? Is that me? Or does anyone else volunteer?
It would be great if you could do that. You may use my recent openmm
transition bug report  as a template. What is important in libcifpp
case is to tell that you are planning to patch the new libcifpp to make
it backwards-compatible with the old libcifpp.
OK, the transition for both has started, see . But I wonder, what
does the status 'partial' mean? Is there something I should do?