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

Bug#809623: RFS: telegram-purple/1.2.5



On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 08:51:11PM +0200, Ben Wiederhake wrote:
> > Is anything happening here?
> > Months passed since last email.
> 
> In short: no, nothing to see here.
> 
> If anyone is willing to work on libtgl's (the vysheng fork) missing API for
> channels (which is the main thing holding up 1.3.0), go for it and implement
> it.  Then implement 1.3.0.  If you do that, I'm more than willing to help
> with the Debianization and maintain it for quite a while :P

In this case, I wonder if this RFS should be closed.  After all, there
is nothing to sponsor here :)
(Also, opening a new one once things are ready would help starting with
a clean history, instead of having a potential sponsor scared by the
quite many messagges already sent here).

> Sorry.  For now, you *could* clone and build from the github "dev-1.3.0"
> branch, if you keep in mind that support for super-groups and channels is
> incomplete (some messages may be silently dropped; some may be duplicated).
> Or just clone and build from master, which is stable (but doesn't support
> super-groups or channels at all).

I wonder if putting in Debian a package with a so fast moving target is
a good choice.  What would happen when such package is in stable and
telegram adds things/changes API?  Do they commit in keeping things
working for 5+ years (stable+oldstable+lts or any ubuntu lts release)?

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: