Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared and static library with cmake)

To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
Cc: Tomasz Buchert <tomasz@debian.org>
Subject: Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)
From: Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 19:24:00 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 20160408172400.GD23072@an3as.eu>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 238B9746-839C-4A2D-8A90-D5F0263BEBE2@tetrinetsucht.de>
References: <[🔎] 20160408153035.GF15234@an3as.eu> <[🔎] 238B9746-839C-4A2D-8A90-D5F0263BEBE2@tetrinetsucht.de>

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 06:16:51PM +0100, Sascha Steinbiss wrote:
> For the record, I seem to remember there is already a libsdsl package in experimental:
> https://packages.qa.debian.org/libs/libsdsl.html

Ahhh, very helpful hint!!

Tomasz, is there any reason to have this package in experimental?

Kind regards

       Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)
  - From: Tomasz Buchert <tomasz@debian.org>

References:
- Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake
  - From: Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>
- Re: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake
  - From: Sascha Steinbiss <satta@tetrinetsucht.de>

Prev by Date: Bug#818184: RFS: hal-flash/0.3.3-1 [ITP]
Next by Date: Bug#816192: RFS: proselint/0.3.5-1 [ITP] -- A prose linter
Previous by thread: Re: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake
Next by thread: Re: Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)

Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared and static library with cmake)