Bug#971067: RFS: libexif-gtk/0.5.0-1
- To: Hugh McMaster <hugh.mcmaster@outlook.com>
- Cc: 971067@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#971067: RFS: libexif-gtk/0.5.0-1
- From: Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de>
- Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2020 07:50:39 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20201003055039.GA1800@argenau.bebt.de>
- Reply-to: Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de>, 971067@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <CAN9Bcdv0XhCsUFvGOehZ7oJ5T3WCeMmULg_1QSBRoodGZc9Mqg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAN9BcduPo5NqT7JBr99dbic3aowTMbNxZt6hTMNW+6tYh3XPRw@mail.gmail.com> <20200929120324.GA1426@argenau.bebt.de> <CAN9Bcdt0ebqxoZe_JRsUHSyMCVjYhbJs9O4UALFXpWNTKuHxAA@mail.gmail.com> <20200930164941.GA1580@argenau.bebt.de> <CAN9Bcdv0XhCsUFvGOehZ7oJ5T3WCeMmULg_1QSBRoodGZc9Mqg@mail.gmail.com> <CAN9BcduPo5NqT7JBr99dbic3aowTMbNxZt6hTMNW+6tYh3XPRw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2020-10-01 Hugh McMaster <hugh.mcmaster@outlook.com> wrote:
[...]
> I've uploaded a new version of libexif-gtk to Debian Mentors, fixing
> the issues discussed in this thread.
> Thanks for your help with this.
Good morning Hugh,
I think this looks alright now.
I thought I should try it out and there is a only single reverse
dependency, gtkam. Afaict gtkam is orphaned and dead upstream (last commit
2016) and does not work with GTK 3. :-(
So I am wondering whether it would not be better for Debian to drop both
libexif-gtk and gtkam instead of of ading to the workload of ftpmaster
by uploading a new version of libexif-gtk.
cu Andreas
--
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
Reply to: