Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 23:42 +0000 schrieb Georg Faerber: > On 20-02-12 00:29:55, Daniel Leidert wrote: > > can we file RM requests for coquelicot and its reverse dependencies > > like ruby- haml-magic-translations? Both are dead upstream and have RC > > bugs. ruby-haml- magic-translations further (build-)depends on a > > non-available ruby-haml version and is not trivial to fix to work with > > ruby-haml 5 (I just tried; or maybe it's just the tests which need > > fixing?). So IMHO if we keep these packages we actually become the new > > upstream for these packages. coquelicot has just two installations > > according to popcon. > > > > Can we agree on filing RM requests? > > Not yet please -- I would like to check with some people before doing > so. Sure. I've pushed what I already did for ruby-haml-magic-translations. Maybe it helps. The patch needs more work. Many tests fail atm. HTH and regards, Daniel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part